HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Carruth, B. R. Articles by Skinner, J. D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Carruth, B. R. Articles by Skinner, J. D.

Revisiting the Picky Eater Phenomenon: Neophobic Behaviors of Young Children

Nutrition Department, College of Human Ecology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee

Address reprint requests to: Betty Ruth Carruth, PhD, RD, Nutrition Department, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996-1900. E-mail: bcarruth{at}utk.edu

	ABSTRACT

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES

 
Objectives: To compare picky eater behaviors (food neophobia) of children as toddlers and at 42 to 84 months of age and to assess their mothers’ neophobic behaviors.

Methods: In a follow-up study of toddlers’ picky eater behaviors, trained interviewers conducted four in-home interviews with mothers (n = 71) when their children were 42, 60, 72 and 84 months of age. Mothers reported children’s diets (1 weekend day and 2 week days, 12 days total) and their behaviors; weight and height were measured. An additional interview at 48 months involved only mothers’ behaviors. Nutritionist IV software, correlations, t tests and repeated measures ANOVA were used to determine nutrient intake, behavioral relationships and differences by picky eater status. Mothers’ descriptions of the children’s food neophobia and bothersome behaviors were analyzed by qualitative methods.

Results: Mothers reported children’s neophobic behaviors at all ages. Mothers’ and children’s behaviors were significantly and consistently correlated for number of attempts before deciding an unfamiliar food was disliked (p < 0.01) and trying unfamiliar foods away from home (p < 0.01). Other behavioral associations were significantly related for some ages but not for all the children’s ages. There were no significant differences by picky eater status for nutrient intake or height and weight at any age. Mothers most frequently attempted unfamiliar entrees away from home because of social setting/relationships. About 20% of mothers attempted unfamiliar foods or new recipes just because they were different.

Conclusions: Findings suggest that some neophobic behaviors of children did not improve with maturity. Mothers’ perceptions about their children’s picky eater status were inconsistent over time.

Key words: neophobia, picky eater, problem eater, novel foods, unfamiliar foods

	INTRODUCTION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES

 
The young child’s acceptance of unfamiliar foods is influenced by parents and siblings in the home [1, 2], peers [3], the social context of eating occasions [4] and the praise or negative response for consuming certain foods [4, 5]. For some types of foods, media and advertising strategies impact on how the child views and selects certain foods [6–8]. Those children who accept only a limited number of foods and are unwilling to try unfamiliar foods may be labeled as neophobic, problem eaters or picky eaters [4, 9, 10].

Children eating a variety of foods, rather than limiting the number consumed, is important because current guidelines for dietary adequacy are more likely to be met when more types of foods are consumed on a regular basis. Dietary variety also relates to willingness of children to taste unfamiliar foods that are defined as safe by their culture [11, 12]. Several investigators have studied infants, preschool and school-age children to determine factors that influence a child’s acceptance of unfamiliar and different types of foods [13–19] and the overall effect of picky eater behaviors on dietary variety [10].

Based on a longitudinal study of white, healthy children (2 to 84 months), the authors found that in the 24-to-36 month period, children who were perceived as picky eaters compared to non-picky eaters had significantly less dietary variety [10]. Mothers reported that their toddlers exhibited repetitive behaviors, such as "eats only peanut butter and jelly" and "will not eat anything green" (vegetables). Studies of preschool children have shown that multiple exposures to unfamiliar foods enhanced their acceptance [14]. Some of the food-related behaviors found in toddlers may relate to developmental issues such as independence [18]. However, as children mature they have more opportunities for eating occasions apart from the family setting, and potentially they have more exposures to unfamiliar foods which could lead to fewer dietary restrictions. In addition, the children’s dietary adequacy could be enhanced if they consumed a greater variety of foods.

This study revisited the picky eater phenomenon and other food-related behaviors that were investigated in a group of toddlers, 24 to 36 months of age [10]. The research purposes were to contrast mothers’ perceptions about their children’s picky eater behaviors (food neophobia) at 24 to 36 months with those perceptions held when their children were 42 to 84 months. We proposed that the limited food acceptance reported for the toddler age would continue in the 42-to-84 month period, although, as the children matured, they could have more exposures to novel and unfamiliar foods at home and away from home. It was hypothesized that how mothers rated their own food-related behaviors would be significantly related to how mothers rated their children’s. Also, it was postulated that the children’s food neophobia, i.e., picky eater status, at each age (42, 60, 72 and 84 months) would be significantly and negatively related to dietary adequacy based on current recommendations.

	METHODS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES

 
Sample
The study sample was composed of 71 mothers whose children were participating in an ongoing longitudinal study from 2 to 96 months of age. The families were of middle and upper socioeconomic status [19]. The major focus of the longitudinal study was to determine dietary intake and growth patterns in white, healthy children [20]. The sample was purposively recruited to study children in a home environment which was characterized by educated parents, adequate food availability and access to health care.

Interviews
As part of the longitudinal study, in-home interviews were conducted with mothers when the study children were 42, 48, 54, 60, 72 and 84 months of age. In this report on picky eaters revisited, data collected at 42, 60, 72 and 84 month interviews will be presented. Some of the behavioral questions specific to the child were not asked at 48 and 54 month interviews.

Children’s Picky Eater Behaviors
In the initial study of children’s picky eater behaviors (24 to 36 months), a questionnaire developed by Pelchat and Pliner [9] and modified for the longitudinal study [10,19] was used to assess the mother’s perceptions about her child’s eating behaviors. The same questionnaire was repeated in this study. It contained 10 items that required mothers to rate their children on a 1–7 point scale which indicated the degree that certain behaviors were observed, such as "How willing is your child to try new and unfamiliar foods?" (1 = almost never, 7 = extremely willing, Table 1). Other behaviors of children involved the variety and amounts of foods eaten, unfamiliar foods tried at home and when offered, the mothers’ use of persuasion/reward and special foods, the degree that mothers were bothered by their children’s behaviors, and whether the children were considered problem eaters. These data were collected when the children were 42, 60, 72 and 84 months of age.

At each of the interviews, mothers responded to open-ended questions about whether they considered their children to be picky eaters (yes/no) and described their children’s picky eater behaviors. The yes answers at each interview were used to classify the child as a picky eater. In a non-sequential section of the same interviews, all mothers were asked to describe anything about their children’s current behavior which bothered them (apart from whether they considered their children to be picky eaters). This process of asking mothers to verbally describe the children’s behaviors as well as rate their behavior provided a basis for the investigators to better interpret quantitative ratings (1–7 point scales) over time (42 to 84 months).

Mothers’ Food Neophobia
When the children were 48 months old, mothers rated their own food-related behaviors, using seven questions comparable to those questions asked about their children (aged 42, 60, 72 and 84 months). Using an open-ended question format, mothers also indicated if they had tried new recipes, the occasion and time and reasons for doing so. Similarly, information was collected about the time and occasion for mothers trying an unfamiliar food or unfamiliar foods, identity of the food or foods and their reasons for trying a new food or new foods. The open-ended questions were used to get further behavioral data about mothers and to relate these results to how mothers described/rated their children’s behaviors.

Children’s Diets
The children’s food intake, using 2-day food records and one 24-hour recall (two week days and one weekend day), were reported by the mothers at the 42, 60, 72 and 84 month interviews. Foods consumed away from home, such as at day care and in-home care, were obtained by mothers from the care givers, and amounts were reported as part of the three days of dietary intake at each of the four interviews. The same trained interviewers (n = 2) who had collected data at 24 to 36 months saw the same families from 42 to 60 months, and then one of the interviewers conducted the yearly interviews at 72 and 84 months. Beginning at two months, mothers were trained in keeping accurate records, and the interviewers probed for possible omissions or errors in the food records/recall data reported by the mothers.

Anthropometry
The interviewer measured the child’s height (without shoes) with a steel tape (nearest 0.1 cm) using a wall or doorway in the home and a square (i.e., 2 boards attached at a right angle). The weight was measured to the nearest 0.1 pound, using a standard scale that was checked with standards of known weight (Model 707; SEA Columbia, MD).

Analyses of Children’s/Mothers’ Behaviors
Statistical.
To contrast mothers’ ratings of their children’s behaviors (10 behavioral statements, 1–7 point rating scales), group means [PROC MEANS, 21] were computed by picky eater status at 34, 42, 60, 72 and 84 months. In the toddler year, the 10 statements were administered twice with no significant difference in mean responses by time period. Thirty-four months represented the average age of children at the second interview (28, 32 or 36 months) and was used in the analyses.

Significant mean differences for mothers’ ratings for 9 of 10 statements at each age and by picky eater versus non-picky eater status were determined with t tests, and a significance level of p = < 0.005 was used. Mothers’ responses for one statement were incomplete at 60 months and were not used in rating the analyses. The higher probability level (p = < 0.005) was set in order to address problems associated with doing multiple t tests and the potential for a Type 1 error.

To determine if trends in perceived picky eater behaviors occurred over time for the group as a whole (n = 71 mothers), mean responses to the nine statements at 34 months were contrasted with mean responses at other time periods (42, 60, 72 and 84 months) using repeated measures ANOVA. A probability level of p = 0.05 was used for significant mean differences by time effect.

Mothers’ responses at 34 months to the nine statements (Table 1) were factor analyzed using principal components procedures. Three factors emerged with eigenvalues > 1.0 and factor loadings > 0.50. One statement loaded equally on two factors and was dropped from analyses. With eight statements loading on three factors (eigenvalues > 1.0 and factor loadings > 0.60), the factors were named food neophobia, persuasion and exposure to unfamiliar foods. For the group of children perceived as picky eaters at 34 months (n = 29, 39%), children’s individual factor scores were calculated for the three factors and group means computed for those considered picky eaters versus non-picky eaters. For the same two groups, factors scores were also determined at 34, 42, 72 and 84 months of age, and 2-tailed t tests were used to determine significant group differences with a probability level of p = 0.05. Data for the 60-month interviews could not be used to generate factor scores because some of the questions were not asked at that time period (Table 1).

For seven comparable questions, Pearson correlation coefficients (p < 0.05) were used to determine significant relationships between how mothers rated their own food-related behaviors at the 48 month interviews and the children’s behaviors from 34 to 84 months. The content of these questions involved the child’s or the mother’s willingness to try an unfamiliar food, liking for a wide variety of foods, attempts (number of tries) before deciding likes/dislikes for an unfamiliar food, overall eating behavior, frequency of eating unfamiliar foods away from home and likes/dislikes (of mother or child) were reflected in foods served to the family.

Qualitative.
For all interview periods (i.e., children’s ages), qualitative analyses [22] were used to develop major themes based on mothers’ responses to open-ended questions about their children’s bothersome behaviors and mothers’ descriptions about behaviors of picky eaters. The first author and a research assistant categorized mothers’ responses into themes, differences were discussed and a consensus reached. A rate of >20 responses for each theme was arbitrarily established as a cut-off point for inclusion of data for further analyses and commentary. This rate represents >28% of the 71 mothers participating in the study. For the data related to mothers’ trying new recipes and unfamiliar foods, frequency counts were made of the quantitative data, and qualitative analyses were performed to develop thematic reasons for mothers trying new recipes and unfamiliar foods.

Analyses of Dietary Data
Nutritionist IV software (Version 4.1, First Databank Division, The Hearst Corporation, San Bruno, CA) was used to calculate each child’s nutrient intake (2 days food record and one 24-hour recall) at 34, 42, 60, 72 and 84 months of age. For each age, mean nutrient intakes by group status (picky eater vs. non-picky eater) were calculated, and t tests were used to determine significant group differences. Nutrient intakes by picky eater status were compared to Recommended Dietary Allowances [23] and Dietary Reference Intakes [24, 25, 26].

Analyses of Anthropometry
Means were calculated by picky eater status for children’s heights and weights at 34, 42, 60, 72 and 84 months. Height and weight differences were determined with 2-tailed t tests and p = 0.05 was established as a significance level.

	RESULTS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES

 
Numerical Ratings of Children’s Behaviors
Mothers’ mean ratings of children’s behaviors at 34, 42, 60, 72 and 84 months of age and by picky (P) and non-picky (NP) eater status are shown in Table 1. The number of mothers who perceived their children as picky eaters fluctuated over time. Twenty-three (32%) children were never perceived as picky eaters, whereas 33 (46%) children were considered to be picky eaters >3 times during the study period. Seven children (10%) were considered picky eaters throughout the study. Of 12 (17%) mothers who considered themselves as picky eaters, only 3 (4%) of their children were considered picky eaters at each age.

In the toddler year (34 months), mean ratings for eight of the nine behavioral items shown in Table 1 were significantly different by picky versus non-picky eater status (p < 0.005). In regard to a mother who considered her child to be a picky eater, this status was significantly and consistently associated with whether she considered her child to have a feeding problem and whether she prepared special foods for the child. Over time most of the mean ratings were significantly different by picky eater status in regard to the child’s overall eating behavior, willingness to try unfamiliar foods and eating a variety of foods. Mean responses to other questions for each age were not consistently and significantly associated with picky eater status (items 4, 5, 6, 8).

Our findings indicate that six of nine behavioral questions showed a significant time effect (p .05) by contrasting mean ratings for the study group (n = 71) at 34 months with means at the other ages and without the children’s picky eater status in the analyses (Table 2). At 84 versus 34 months, the children were rated as better eaters, as trying more unfamiliar foods at home and as eating the amounts of foods that their mothers thought they should consume. At 60 months versus 34 months, mothers were using persuasion more often, and at 42 months children were less willing to try unfamiliar foods, and mothers were providing rewards more often. Because only 12 of the 71 children were consistently reported as picky eaters from 34 to 84 months of age, the sample size was not adequate to do analyses by individual data over time.

Correlations between Mothers’ and Children’s Behaviors
For comparable questions where mothers numerically rated their children’s (ages 34, 42, 60, 72 and 84 months) and their own behaviors (48 months), five of seven items were significantly correlated. Mothers and children’s scores for the number of times an unfamiliar food was attempted before deciding it was disliked were significantly correlated across all children’s ages, (p < 0.0001 at 34 months, p < 0.0001 at 42, p = 0.0002 at 60, p = 0.0032 at 72 and p = 0.0031 at 84 months). An average of fewer than three attempts was consistently reported for both groups. For the number of times an unfamiliar food was attempted before deciding to like it, the correlations were significant at 34 months (p = 0.0016), 60 months (p = 0.0004) and 72 months (p = 0.0112). Significant correlations were found for the extent that child or mother liked a wide variety of foods at 60 months (p = 0.0284) and that foods served to the family reflected (mother or child) likes/dislikes at 72 months (p = 0.0203). Ratings of mother and child for the behavior of trying new and unfamiliar foods away from home were significantly correlated at 60 (p = 0.0016), 72 (p = 0.006) and 84 months (p < 0.0001). The most consistent and significant correlations between mothers’ and children’s behaviors were the number of attempts before deciding an unfamiliar food was disliked and trying new and unfamiliar foods away from home. No correlations at any time period were significant for how mothers rated their own eating behaviors as a whole and the behavior of their children or whether a mother considered herself a picky eater vs. perceiving the child as a picky eater.

Qualitative Themes about Mothers’ and Children’s Behaviors
Children’s Food Neophobia.
Three major themes emerged from analyses of mothers’ responses when describing behaviors of a picky eater (Table 3). Their children were unwilling to try new foods and refused to eat unfamiliar foods when offered. These behaviors were described as food neophobia by Pelchat and Pliner [11]. Picky eater behaviors included the children limiting the number of acceptable foods and the lack of dietary variety. Some mothers catered to their children’s list of acceptable foods (Table 3). Picky eaters rejected specific food groups or types of foods within a food group, e.g., vegetables, some fruits and some types of meat products. Although the number of mothers’ responses did not meet criteria (>20 responses/theme) for some behaviors, there were trends for other themes such as children’s not finishing food portions, the appearance of food greatly influencing its acceptability and the development by some of intractable mind sets toward specific foods.

Over time, mothers reported bothersome behaviors, such as messiness and manners, that occurred around the eating occasion. Children played with rather than ate foods offered, or, in some cases, the children carefully dissected the foods, ate some portion and smeared uneaten portions on the table or fed the family pet. From 42 to 84 months, mothers increasingly commented that children should be using forks and spoons instead of their hands, should eat the food offered without being so messy and should exhibit behaviors that were less offensive/obnoxious (e.g., loud burping, placing feet on table).

Mothers’ Food Neophobia.
The identity of new foods attempted, the occasion and mothers’ reasons were categorized and are presented as summarized findings. Unfamiliar foods cited most frequently by mothers included entrees, ethnic foods and vegetables/fruits or combinations of salad ingredients, whereas grain products, desserts and beverages were cited less frequently. Reasons that mothers attempted unfamiliar foods involved social settings and/or a relationship (e.g., husband, office group, birthday), appearance/perceived goodness and taste of foods or that the tried food was different. Some unfamiliar sea foods and ethnic-type dishes were reported as both entrees and appetizers, e.g., sushi, smoked salmon, chicken nachos. The mean time since they had tried an unfamiliar food was 3.25 ± 5.62 months, with one mother reporting no attempts in the previous three years.

New recipes tried by mothers included entrees, fruits/vegetables (as salad ingredients and individually) and grain products. The major reason given by mothers involved convenience, such as having ingredients on-hand, seeing recipes that looked easy to fix or having chicken in the freezer or zucchini in the garden. Mothers relied on magazines and cookbooks that pictorially displayed foods that looked good and mothers were familiar with the ingredients of. As with trying unfamiliar foods (primarily away from home), trying new recipes involved relationships where a relative (e.g., aunt, mother-in-law), child or the husband was associated with the occasion. About 20% of mothers tried a new recipe because it was just different than foods normally prepared. However, none of the unfamiliar foods or recipes cited by mothers represented exotic or rare foods. These results may be greatly influenced by the neophobic behaviors of some children and the children’s age when data were collected.

Picky Eaters’ Diets
The dietary intake of children designated as picky eaters at 34 to 84 months were compared to age-appropriate nutrient and energy allowances/dietary reference intakes. As shown in Table 5, energy intakes for picky eaters approximated recommendations. Protein, magnesium, calcium and vitamins A, C, B₆ and B₁₂ exceeded 100%, whereas zinc, vitamin D and vitamin E were below 100% of the recommendations at 34, 42, 60, 72 and 84 months. Folate intake of children considered picky eaters fluctuated over time but exceeded recommendations for three of the five time periods. The lower longitudinal dietary intakes of zinc, vitamins D and E of the study group have been reported previously [19]. As percent of energy over time, fat ranged from 31 to 32 percent and protein 13 to 15 percent. The consumption of fortified grain products increased dietary folate, iron, vitamin B₆ and B₁₂. Except for zinc, vitamins D and E, picky eater status was associated with meeting the age-appropriate dietary recommendations. Mean nutrient intakes, using p = 0.001, by picky eater versus non-picky eater status were not significantly different at any time period.

	DISCUSSION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES

 
Our hypothesis that the children’s limited food acceptance as toddlers would continue in the 42-to-84 month age period was supported by descriptions of children’s food neophobia and by some of the bothersome behaviors reported by mothers who did not consider their children picky eaters. Comparisons of picky eaters’ factor scores at 34 months and over time also indicate a continuance of some children’s food neophobic behavior over time.

As the children matured, bothersome behaviors increasingly related to non-food events, such as manners. Sanders et al. reported that children with feeding problems exhibited higher levels of disruptive behaviors at mealtime, e.g., food refusal, playing with food and oppositional behavior [4]. As reported previously [10], picky eaters in our study rejected entire groups of foods, particularly vegetables, and foods within groups, such as no red muscle meats. However, there are some positive outcomes for the total study group at 84 months; mothers’ mean ratings for their children’s eating behaviors overall, willingness to try unfamiliar foods and amounts of food consumed were more favorable than at 34 months.

Non-food related behaviors in the toddler year may reflect aspects of autonomy development [18]; however, data from the later ages (60 to 84 months) showed that the children were approaching eating occasions quite differently. Food preferences were strongly expressed (using verbal and physical tactics), and some mothers perceived these actions as picky eater behaviors of the children and other mothers reported them as bothersome behaviors.

Several investigators have published methodologies which provide operational definitions of neophobic behavior [12, 13]. In studies about neophobic traits of families and children, behavioral measures, such as sampling novel (unfamiliar) foods and mothers’ assessment of their children’s willingness to taste unfamiliar foods, have been assessed [12, 13]. In 5-to-11-year-old children, trait neophobic scores (pencil and paper assessments) and behavioral scores of parents and their children were significantly related [12]. In 57 Swedish families, higher food neophobia score of mothers and their children were associated with the mother serving fewer foods in the last six months from a list of unfamiliar foods [13].

In our study, the significant correlation between mothers and their children for the number of exposures to an unfamiliar food before deciding that the food was disliked may involve an expected sensory experience [28, 29], social expectations [15] or the modeling of mothers or other adults in the child’s environment [30]. Mothers and children in the current study had an average of fewer than three exposures before deciding they disliked an unfamiliar food. In the Birch et al. study of 3-to-5-year old children, 10 or 15 exposures were associated with increased acceptance of a new food [14]. Although children in our study may have avoided unfamiliar foods because they feared a negative sensory food experience, food neophobia of younger children compared to older children has been reported by other investigators [1, 11, 13]. Our results clearly show that the children were not given numerous and consistent exposures to unfamiliar foods over time. As reported previously, food preferences of the study children as toddlers and concordance with preferences of family members were assessed [31]. The findings suggested that the most limiting category related to foods consumed by the toddlers was that foods were never offered to them.

Twelve study mothers rated themselves as picky eaters and had a limited number of acceptable foods. Even among mothers who did not consider themselves picky eaters, there were also trends of attempting only certain types of new foods at home and away from home. Unfamiliar foods attempted primarily away from home were associated with social settings in which conformity may have been expected or the mothers attempted new foods to avoid social rejection. Also unfamiliar foods recommended by a significant other (relatives, friends) within a social setting context implied that the unfamiliar foods were culturally defined as acceptable [15]. Sixty percent of mothers in our study tried unfamiliar foods of animal origin compared to 40% who tried foods of vegetable/plant origin. This finding is inconsistent with literature showing that unfamiliar foods of animal origin may be less acceptable than those of vegetable/plant origin [16].

The mothers’ modeling of food neophobia may have negatively influenced the study children’s behaviors. Harper and Sander [32] studied mothers or other adults who offered a food to young children without tasting or first tasted the food and then offered it to the children. The children’s willingness to taste the offered food was positively influenced by the adults tasting the food before offering it to the children.

Growth patterns of the study children irrespective of their picky eater status over time demonstrated they were receiving adequate diets to achieve normal growth for age and gender [27]. These findings also are compatible with the fluctuations that mothers perceived their children to be picky eaters at one age and not another age.

In addressing limitations of the study, longitudinal data have an inherent strength that measurements of the same children are made over time, and their environment and development can be monitored to better explain research findings. However, the participants may not be representative of the general population. In our study, the children’s ages (34 to 84 months) required that mothers’ report their perceptions about the children’s food neophobia and dietary intake. In studies with older children, they can respond to behavioral statements similar to those used in our study, taste foods and/or rank foods [1,13, 28]. With preschool children, tasting activities could be used to validate mothers’ perceptions about their children’s food neophobia. This may be considered a limitation of our study, but the advantage of longitudinal data enabled the investigators to study adult modeling and family environment factors that influence young children’s food neophobia.

	CONCLUSION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES

 
Given that all study mothers described neophobic behaviors of their children at various ages, what can be done to modify these behaviors and increase the number of acceptable foods? Would our findings be different over time if, beginning with the toddler age, mothers had increased the number of new food exposures (> 10 exposures vs. 6/year) at home and away from home and had provided opportunities for tasting unfamiliar foods combined with positive adult role modeling? For example, only 20% of the mothers tried a new recipe just because it was different. The mothers’ neophobic modeling may be influencing the minimal changes reported for the study children. In addition, the children’s food neophobia may reflect the fact that over half of the children attended some type of day care where institutional regulations would dictate the variety of foods offered at meals and snack times. It is likely that children’s positive sensory experiences at home were repeated in eating occasions away from home, rather than the children’s having an increased exposure and opportunity to taste an unfamiliar food.

Change strategies for children perceived as picky eaters should include at a minimum, pencil and paper assessment of the parents’ neophobia traits. It is unlikely that children will be accepting of unfamiliar foods if the parents exhibit neophobia traits. Educational strategies with young children must include multiple opportunities to taste new foods within social contexts that reinforce that food’s acceptability [11, 13, 14, 30]. Mothers in our study received child feeding information from multiple and concurrent sources throughout the 2-to-84-month study [33]. Thus there are many educational venues (professionals, relatives, friends and media sources) for reaching parents whose children exhibit food neophobia.

Received June 14, 2000. Accepted September 22, 2000.

	REFERENCES

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION CONCLUSION REFERENCES

 

1. Koivisto UK, Sjödén PO: Food and general neophobia in Swedish families: Parent-child comparisons and relationships with serving specific foods. Appetite 26: 107–118, 1996.[Medline]
2. Pliner P, Pelchat ML: Similarities in food preferences between children and their siblings and parents. Appetite 7: 333–342, 1986.[Medline]
3. Birch LL: Effects of peer models’ food choices and eating behaviors on preschoolers’ food preferences. Child Develop 51: 489–496, 1980.
4. Sanders MR, Patel RK, Le Grice B, Shepherd RW: Children with persistent feeding difficulties. An observational analysis of the feeding interactions of problem and non-problem eaters. Health Psychol 12: 64–73, 1993.[Medline]
5. Birch LL, Johnston SL, Fisher JA: Children’s eating: The development of food-acceptance patterns. Young Children 50: 71–78, 1995.
6. Kotz K, Story M: Food advertisements during children’s Saturday morning television programming: Are they consistent with dietary recommendations? J Am Diet Assoc 94: 1296–1300, 1994.[Medline]
7. Kuntz LA: Designing products for kids: More than child’s play. Food Prod Jan: 35–50, 1996.
8. Mizerski R: The relationship between cartoon trade character recognition and attitude toward product category in young children. J Marketing 59: 58–70, 1995.
9. Pelchat ML, Pliner P: Antecedents and correlates of feeding problems in young children. J Nutr Educ 18: 23–29, 1986.
10. Carruth BR, Skinner J, Houck K, Moran III J, Coletta F, Ott D: The phenomenon of "picky eater": A behavioral marker in eating patterns of toddlers. J Am Coll Nutr 17: 180–186, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
11. Pelchat ML, Pliner P: "Try it, You’ll like it." Effects of information on willingness to try novel foods. Appetite 24: 153–166, 1995.[Medline]
12. Pliner P: Development of measures of food neophobia in children. Appetite 23: 147–163, 1994.[Medline]
13. Koivisto UK, Sjödén PO: Reasons for rejection of food items in Swedish families with children aged 2–17. Appetite 26: 89–103, 1996.[Medline]
14. Birch LL, McPhee L, Shoba BC, Pirok E, Steinberg L: What kind of exposure reduces children’s food neophobia? Appetite 9: 171–178, 1987.[Medline]
15. Birch LL, Gunder L, Grimm-Thomas K, Laing DG: Infants’ consumption of a new food enhances acceptance of similar foods. Appetite 30: 283–295, 1998.[Medline]
16. Pliner P, Pelchat ML: Neophobia in humans and the special status of foods of animal origin. Appetite 16: 205–218, 1991.[Medline]
17. Koivisto UK, Sjödén PO: Food and general neophobia and their relationship with self-reported food choice: Familial resemblance in Swedish families with children of ages 7–17 years. Appetite 29: 89–103, 1997.[Medline]
18. Kuczynski L, Kochanska G: Development of children’s noncompliance strategies from toddlerhood to age 5. Dev Psychol 26: 398–408, 1990.
19. Skinner JD, Carruth BR, Houck KS, Bounds W, Morris M, Cox DR, Moran III J, Coletta F: Longitudinal study of nutrient and food intakes of white preschool children aged 24 to 60 months. J Am Diet Assoc 99: 1514–1521, 1999.[Medline]
20. Skinner JD, Carruth BR, Houck KS, Coletta F, Cotter R, Ott D, McLeod M: Longitudinal study of nutrient and food intakes of infants aged 2 to 24 months. J Am Diet Assoc 97: 496–504, 1997.[Medline]
21. SAS Institute Inc: "SAS User’s Guide: Basics." (Version 6.11) Gary, NC: SAS Institute 1988.
22. Taylor SJ, Brodgan R: "Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods," 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons, pp 123–145, 1984.
23. Food and Nutrition Board: "Recommended Dietary Allowances," 10th ed. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1989.
24. Food and Nutrition Board: "Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium, Phosphorus, Magnesium, Vitamin D and Fluoride." Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1997.
25. Food and Nutrition Board: "Dietary Reference Intakes for Thiamin, Riboflavin, Niacin, Vitamin B₆, Folate, Vitamin B₁₂, Pantothenic Acid, Biotin, and Choline." Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1998.
26. Food and Nutrition Board: "Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin E, Vitamin C, Selenium, and Carotenoids." Washington, DC: National Academy of Press, 2000.
27. Kuczmarski RJ, Ogden CL, Grummer-Strawn LM, Flegal KM, Guo SS, Wei R, Mei Z, Curtin LR, Roche AF, Johnson CL: "CDC Growth Charts: United States. Advance Data from Vital and Health Statistics," No. 314. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, 2000.
28. Raudenbush B, Frank RA: Assessing food neophobia. The role of stimulus familiarity. Appetite 32: 261–271, 1999.[Medline]
29. Raudenbush B, Schroth F, Frank RA: Food neophobia, odor evaluation and exploratory sniffing behaviors. Appetite 31: 171–183, 1998.[Medline]
30. Hobden K, Pliner P: Effects of a model on food neophobia in humans. Appetite 25: 101–114, 1995.[Medline]
31. Skinner JS, Carruth BR, Moran III J, Houck K, Schmidhammer J, Reed A, Coletta F, Cotter R, Ott D: Toddlers’ food preferences: Concordance with family members’ preferences. J Nutr Educ 30: 17–22, 1998.
32. Harper LV, Sanders KM: The effect of adult’s eating on young children’s acceptance of novel foods. J Exper Child Psychol 20: 206–214, 1975.
33. Carruth BR, Skinner J: Mothers’ sources of information about feeding their children, aged 2–54 months. J Nutr Educ (In press).

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Carruth, B. R. Articles by Skinner, J. D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Carruth, B. R. Articles by Skinner, J. D.