Ijerph 19 01217

International Journal of
Environmental Research
and Public Health
Review
Consumer Acceptance toward Functional Foods: A
Scoping Review
Mathew T. Baker * , Peng Lu , Jean A. Parrella and Holli R. Leggette
Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communications, Texas A&M University,

College Station, TX 77843, USA; peng.lu@ag.tamu.edu (P.L.); Jparrella@tamu.edu (J.A.P.);
Holli.Leggette@ag.tamu.edu (H.R.L.)
* Correspondence: Mathew.T.Baker@gmail.com
Abstract: Chronic diseases (e.g., heart disease, cancer, diabetes) are of major public concern. Such
chronic diseases are often caused by a dietary pattern characterized as relatively high in fat, refined
sugar, salt, and cholesterol. Societal interest in consuming healthy foods and the demand for healthy
food products have increased significantly. As a result, functional foods have gained significant
research attention in the food health and technology innovations field. To date, many studies have
investigated the factors that may predict consumer acceptance of functional foods, and a wide range
of influential factors have been reported. However, studies conducted in different contexts pose chal-
lenges to gaining a clear understanding of the factors influencing consumer acceptance. Therefore, the
purpose of our scoping review was to synthesize the possible determinants of consumer acceptance
toward functional foods and provide a resource that describes global trends regarding consumers’
functional foods behavior. We identified 75 articles published with varying populations around
the globe that empirically investigated consumers’ acceptance of functional foods. We identified
and categorized a wide range of determinants related to consumer acceptance of different types of
functional foods. The five categories of determinants were product characteristics, socio-demographic

characteristics, psychological characteristics, behavioral characteristics, and physical characteristics.
Citation: Baker, M.T.; Lu, P.; Parrella,
Each of the determinants were more fully described by sub-determinants in our scoping review.
J.A.; Leggette, H.R. Consumer
Acceptance toward Functional Foods:
These determinants should be considered and used by leaders and scientists in product development
A Scoping Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. to aid decision making and, ultimately, the successful launch of novel functional foods.
Public Health 2022, 19, 1217. https://
doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19031217 Keywords: functional foods; consumer acceptance; scoping review
Academic Editor: Paul B.

Tchounwou
Received: 21 December 2021 1. Introduction

Accepted: 20 January 2022 Chronic diseases (e.g., heart disease, cancer, and diabetes) are of major public concern.
Published: 22 January 2022
Such chronic diseases are often caused by a dietary pattern characterized as relatively high
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral in fat, refined sugar, salt, and cholesterol [1]. Older persons are at an increasingly higher
with regard to jurisdictional claims in risk of developing chronic diseases, which is becoming a significant problem as the world
published maps and institutional affil- population continues to age [2]. In addition to an aging population and the increased
iations. development of chronic diseases, the steady increase in life expectancy and quality coupled
with severe side effects caused by drugs and pharmaceuticals have driven the need for
developing safety-affirmed foods enriched with adequate nutrients [3,4]. Consuming
foods enriched with functional ingredients (e.g., vitamins, probiotic, minerals, fiber, and
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
antioxidants) could reduce the risk of chronic diseases and improve physical and mental
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
well-being [5–7].
This article is an open access article
Functional foods have gained significant research attention throughout the decades,
distributed under the terms and
especially in the areas of improved food health and technology [3]. The concept of func-
conditions of the Creative Commons
tional food has been defined several times, yet there is no universally accepted definition
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
of this term [8–10]. Between 1995 and 1998, more than 100 experts in nutrition and related
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
sciences reached a consensus on the definition of functional foods as part of the European
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 1217. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19031217 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 1217 2 of 40
Commission’s Concerted Action on Functional Food Science, coordinated by the Interna-

tional Life Sciences Institute. The European Consensus Document stated that “food can
be regarded as functional if it is satisfactorily demonstrated to affect beneficially one or
more target functions in the body, beyond adequate nutritional effects, in a way that is
relevant to either improved stage of health and well-being and/or reduction of risk of
disease” [11] (p. 6), which has been the most widely cited definition of functional food in
previous studies.
Alternative definitions also exist across food and nutrition institutes. For example, in
1994, the Institute of Medicine of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences’ Food and Nutrition
Board defined functional foods as “any modified food or food ingredient that may provide
a health benefit beyond the traditional nutrients it contains” [12] (p. 109). Similarly, in
2005, the Institute of Food Technologists defined functional foods as foods that provide a
health benefit beyond their basic nutrition [13]. More recently, in 2014, the Functional Food
Center defined functional foods as “natural or processed foods that contain biologically
active compounds; which, in defined, effective, and non-toxic amounts, provide a clinically
proven and documented health benefit utilizing specific biomarkers for the prevention,
management, or treatment of chronic disease or its symptoms” [14] (p. 215). However,
despite these varying definitions, experts generally agree that functional foods contain
ingredients that provide health benefits beyond the food’s basic nutritional components.
With the popularity of functional foods, people are becoming increasingly aware
of food quality and the health benefits associated with different foods [4]. As a result,
people’s interest in consuming healthy foods and the demand for healthy food products
have increased significantly. Therefore, it is necessary to develop novel functional foods
to meet these demands [15]. However, not only is the development of functional foods a
complex and expensive process that involves uncertainty and risk issues, but consumers’
food adoption is also a complex and slow process that is dependent on many factors [16].
Because consumers’ uncertainty and skepticism toward novel functional foods could
influence their acceptance of such products [10,17,18], understanding their responses to
functional foods is vital [10].
To date, many studies have investigated the factors that may predict consumer ac-
ceptance of functional foods, and a wide range of influential factors have been reported.
However, studies conducted in different contexts pose challenges to gaining a clear and
comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing consumer acceptance. The variety
of factors and the complex relationships between them make it difficult to describe general
trends, which would benefit scientists and functional food manufactures when developing
and launching functional foods. The wide range of influential factors also poses challenges
for communicating and marketing professionals in the functional foods industry when de-
veloping accurate and precise communications strategies and other promotional materials
designed to improve consumers acceptance of functional foods.
Reviews published in the context of healthy or modified foods have focused on
consumer evaluation of food with nutritional benefits [19], the credibility of functional
product effects [20], nutrition-modified and functional dairy products [21], and organic
food consumption [22]. Together, these reviews have provided some valuable insights into
the factors influencing consumer acceptance of healthy foods or specific functional food
aspects. However, to the best of our knowledge, there has been no scoping review that
comprehensively synthesizes the identified factors that may predict consumer acceptance
of functional foods. Therefore, the purpose of our scoping review was to synthesize the pos-
sible determinants of consumer acceptance toward functional foods and provide a resource
that describes global trends regarding consumers’ behaviors toward functional foods.
2. Methods
A scoping review can be conducted to systematically explore the literature, synthesize
existing evidence, and address knowledge gaps [23]. Therefore, a scoping review was
the most appropriate methodology to achieve the study’s purpose because it allowed
us to gather relevant literature across databases, identify and synthesize key factors in-
fluencing consumer acceptance of functional foods, and develop a novel comprehensive
understanding of this phenomenon. Our scoping review was conducted by following
the guides developed by Arksey and O’Malley [24]. The procedures were as follows: to
identify research objectives, to identify databases, to develop search strategies, to determine
inclusion and exclusion criteria to screen relevant studies, to develop a coding approach to
categorize determinants, and to summarize and report the results.
2.1. Research Objectives

To achieve the study’s purpose of synthesizing possible determinants of consumer
acceptance toward functional foods and providing a resource that describes global trends,
the three objectives were as follows: (1) to outline the included studies’ characteristics,
(2) to identify and categorize the determinants investigated in reviewed studies, and (3) to
provide implications for future social and behavioral scientists who work in the domain of
consumer acceptance of functional foods. We believe this review will benefit leaders and
researchers in product development by providing comprehensive evidence that aims to
improve consumer acceptance of functional foods.
2.2. Databases and Search Strategy

We conducted literature searches in October 2020 using four databases—Web of Science
Core Collection, Medline (OVID), CAB abstracts, and Google Scholar. We selected these
databases after consulting with a subject librarian. Using these four databases ensured
the adequate inclusion of relevant references in our scoping review. We began the search
process using Google Scholar, which uses a full-text indexes approach. Therefore, we
reviewed the first 200 search results presented by Google Scholar, which the database
deemed most relevant based on our search terms. After reviewing these search results
from Google Scholar, we determined the search terms and Boolean operators for the other
three databases (Web of Science Core Collection, Medline [OVID], and CAB Abstracts).
The first set of search terms included “functional food*” OR “functional product*” OR
“enriched food*” OR “enriched product*” OR “fortified product*”. The second set of search
terms included “consumer accept*” OR “consumer purchase behavior*” OR “consumer
attitude*” OR “consumer perception*” OR “consumer willingness to pay” OR “consumer
willingness to buy”. Then, we conducted a manual search for several additional studies
that we obtained from the reference lists of studies already included. We validated our
search process by examining reviews published on similar topics and comparing their
included studies and reference lists to ours.
2.3. Study Management and Screening

Covidence systematic review management software was used for the management of
the published research and subsequent screening. The established inclusion and exclusion
criteria that informed the process of screening are presented in Table 1.
First, the identified studies were assessed through title and abstract screening. Then,
a full-text review was conducted to identify studies that satisfied all inclusion criteria.
Two of the authors independently completed the title and abstract screening of the initial
1341 studies (after duplicates were removed) and achieved an agreement rate of 89.41%
(n = 1199). We solved the discrepancies through discussions and consultations with the
third and fourth authors until consensus was reached [23]. Ultimately, 75 studies were
included in our scoping review (see Figure 1).
2.4. Data Extraction and Determinants’ Synthesis

Data extraction was performed using a data extraction template developed by the au-
thors based on our research objectives. The data extraction template included the following
categories: authors and year of publication, research method, functional foods studied,
continent in which the research was conducted, sample size, key findings, determinants,
and outcome measures (see Appendix A). Two authors independently extracted this in-
formation from the 75 included studies. We used open coding procedures to extract the
included studies’ characteristics and classify the determinants of consumer acceptance of
functional foods into five broad categories. The categories of the determinants were based
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19,
on1217
our modification of a previously published review [21]. 4 of 37
Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria for article screening.

4. Studies published in English and in peer-reviewed journals between January 2000
Inclusion Criteria
and October 2020.
1. Quantitative studies examining the possible determinants related to consumer behaviors
Exclusion Criteria
toward functional food.
1. Qualitative studies.
2. 2. Studies
Studies focusing on
investigating modifiedfoods
functional or altered functional
that were foods.or modified.
not altered
3. 3. Studies
Participants restricted
that focused to 18 years
on a specific and older.
population (e.g., women, older people, children,
4. andStudies
comparisons between
published children
in English andand adults).
in peer-reviewed journals between January 2000 and
4. Book chapters,
October secondary articles, and reviews.
2020.
5. Exclusion
Studies published
Criteria in a non-English language and before January 2000 and after Oc-
tober 2020.
1. Qualitative studies.
6. Studies focusing on production side of functional foods (e.g., the development pro-
2. cess,Studies investigating
evaluation functional
of functional foods and
ingredients, that packing
were notmethods).
altered or modified.
7. Studies comparing consumer acceptance between conventionalolder
3. Studies that focused on a specific population (e.g., women, food people, children, and
and functional
comparisons between children and
food or organic food and functional food. adults).
4. Book chapters, secondary articles, and reviews.
5. First, the identified
Studies publishedstudies were assessed
in a non-English throughand
language titlebefore
and abstract
Januaryscreening. Then,
2000 and after
a full-text review2020.
October was conducted to identify studies that satisfied all inclusion criteria.
Two of the authors independently completed the title and abstract screening of the initial
6. Studies focusing on production side of functional foods (e.g., the development process,
1341 studies (after duplicates were removed) and achieved an agreement rate of 89.41%
evaluation of functional ingredients, and packing methods).
(n = 1199). We solved the discrepancies through discussions and consultations with the
7. andStudies
third fourthcomparing consumer
authors until acceptance
consensus between
was reached conventional
[23]. Ultimately,food and functional
75 studies were food or
includedorganic food and
in our scoping functional
review food. 1).
(see Figure
Figure 1. Literature review search and screening process.

Figure 1. Literature review search and screening process.
3. Results
Most
2.4. Data of theand
Extraction 75 included studies
Determinants’ were conducted in Europe (n = 47) and Asia (n = 17),
Synthesis
with 11 extraction
Data studies conducted in North
was performed using America (n = 6),template
a data extraction South America
developed(nby= the
1), and Aus-
authors based on our research objectives. The data extraction template included the fol-the studies
tralia/Oceania (n = 4) published between 2000 and 2020 (see Figure 2). Among
included,
lowing surveys
categories: were and
authors the year
mostofcommon research
publication, method
research used
method, to assess
functional consumer ac-
foods
ceptance
studied, of functional
continent in whichfood. The data
the research wascollection
conducted,strategies and
sample size, keyresearch
findings,methods
deter- varied,
and included
minants, face-to-face
and outcome questionnaires
measures (see Appendix [25,26],
A). Two computer-aided questionnaires
authors independently extracted [27–29],
this information from the 75 included studies. We used open coding procedures to extract
the included studies’ characteristics and classify the determinants of consumer acceptance
based on our modification of a previously published review [21].
3. Results
Most of the 75 included studies were conducted in Europe (n = 47) and Asia (n = 17),
with 11 studies conducted in North America (n = 6), South America (n = 1), and Aus-
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 1217 tralia/Oceania (n = 4) published between 2000 and 2020 (see Figure 2). Among the studies
5 of 40
included, surveys were the most common research method used to assess consumer ac-
ceptance of functional food. The data collection strategies and research methods varied,
and included face-to-face questionnaires [25,26], computer-aided questionnaires [27–29],
questionnaire-basedquestionnaire-based
economic evaluation economic evaluation techniques
techniques such as experimental
such as experimental auctions
auctions [30–
[30–32],
32], conjoint analysis [33–35], and choice experiments [36,37]. The types of functional
conjoint analysis [33–35], and choice experiments [36,37]. The types of functional foods
foods investigated in the included studies were functional meats, functional beverages,
investigated in thefunctional
includeddairy
studies werefunctional
products, functional meats,
fruits, functional
and functional beverages,
snacks functional
(e.g., cookies, yogurt,
dairy products, functional fruits, and functional snacks (e.g., cookies, yogurt, and cereals).
and cereals).
12
10
8
Number of articles
0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Year of publication
Figure 2. Year of publication of the 75 articles included in the scoping review.

Figure 2. Year of publication of the 75 articles included in the scoping review.
Based on our consensus, the determinants were classified into five categories. The
Based on ourfiveconsensus, the determinants
categories—product were
characteristics, classified into
socio-demographic five psychological
factors, categories. char-
The
five categories—product
acteristics,characteristics, socio-demographic
behavioral characteristics, factors, psychological
and physical characteristics—are char-
described below.
Each of
acteristics, behavioral the categories are and
characteristics, morephysical
fully described by individual determinants
characteristics—are (see Figure
described 3).
below.
Consumer acceptance is defined as outcome measurements in our scoping review, which
Each of the categories are more fully described by individual determinants (see Figure 3).
includes general acceptance [38], willingness to pay [30,37], willingness to buy [39,40],
Consumer acceptance is defined
willingness as outcome
to try [33], perceptionsmeasurements
of functional foodsin[34,41],
our scoping review,
consumption which
of functional
includes general acceptance [38], willingness
foods [42,43], purchase to pay
intention [44–47], and [30,37], willingness
choice of functional foodsto buy [39,40],
[48–50].
willingness to try [33], perceptions of functional foods [34,41], consumption of functional
foods [42,43], purchase intention [44–47], and choice of functional foods [48–50].
3.1. Product Characteristics

The reviewed studies indicated that product characteristics (i.e., the combination of
carriers and ingredients, price, taste, brand, and health information) can influence consumer
acceptance of functional foods.
3.1.1. The Combination of Carriers and Ingredients

Functional foods are those fortified with vitamins, minerals, and various micronu-
trients [51], and adding new functional ingredients to a functional food carrier is how
new functional foods are developed [52]. For example, yogurt (carrier) can be enriched
with antioxidants and fiber (functional ingredients; [48]). The combination of carriers and
ingredients used to create functional foods has been identified as a critical factor influencing
consumers’ perceptions and acceptance of the products [28,53–56]. Previous studies found
consumers were more likely to accept functional foods with perceived healthier carriers
and natural enrichments. For example, participants in Van Kleef et al.’s [57] study showed
greater preferences for healthier carriers (e.g., margarine and yogurt) when compared
with indulgence-type foods (e.g., chewing gum, ice cream, and chocolate). Similarly, Ver-
beke et al. [58] found fiber-enriched cereals were more accepted than calcium-enriched
juice because of the less healthy combination of juice with calcium. These findings were
consistent with Bech-Larsen and Grunert’s [59] findings that consumers considered inher-
ently wholesome foods (e.g., yogurt) as being healthier carriers than unwholesome foods
(e.g., spreads).
Product Characteristics
Carrier/ingredient combination (n = 10 )
Health information (n = 10)
(n = 27)
Taste (n = 6)
Price (n = 7 )
Brand (n = 3)
Education (n = 16)
Characteristics (n = 29)
Socio-Demographic
Age (n = 17)
Gender (n = 13)
Household characteristics (n = 5)
Nationality and geographic location (n = 3)
Marital status (n = 2)
Attitudes (n = 18)
Psychological Characteristics
Health consciousness (n = 16 )
Knowledge (n = 10)
(n = 51)
Beliefs (n = 8)
Motivations (n = 5)
Perceptions (n = 5)
Trust (n = 10) and food neophobia (n = 5)

Behavioral Characteristics
Lifestyle (n = 6)
(n = 11)
Health related behavior (n = 4)
Innovative-seeking behavior (n = 1)
Physical Characteristcis
Presence of diet-related problem (n = 1)
Subjective health complaints (n = 1)

(n = 6)
Body mass index (n = 2)
Poor subjective health (n = 2)
Figure3. 3.Categories
Figure Categoriesand anddeterminants
determinantsofofconsumer
consumeracceptance
acceptancetoward
towardfunctional
functionalfoods
foodsand
andthe
the
numberofofarticles
number articlesthat
thatwere
were investigated.
investigated.
In addition to the influence of functional carriers, the manner in which the product
ingredients were manufactured or inserted affected consumer acceptance. Specifically,
consumers were inclined to accept functional foods in which the ingredient enrichment
process occurred naturally [46,53]. Jahn et al.’s study [46], which measured consumers’
perceived appropriateness of functional food carriers, suggested that less processed prod-
ucts (e.g., milk) were considered more natural and appropriate for vitamin D fortification
compared to processed products (e.g., sausage, fish, and liver pate). Furthermore, in an
unrelated study, Krutulyte et al. [55] found that consumers tend to be more accepting
of functional foods that contain an ingredient/carrier combination with which they are
already familiar.
3.1.2. Price
Previous studies have found that the price of functional foods may have some influence
on consumer acceptance [48,60,61]. In general, consumers tend to pay a reasonable price to
get the health benefits of consuming functional foods [45,61,62]. Accordingly, price could
affect consumer acceptance in two contradicting ways: (1) a higher price may decrease
consumers’ purchase intention or (2) a higher price may increase consumers’ purchase
intention because it may increase the products’ perceived quality [45,48,63]. Ares et al. [48]
found that price had a significant negative effect on consumers’ consumption of functional
yogurts. Similarly, Narayana et al. [50] found many Sri Lankan consumers were more
concerned about the price of functional foods rather than the health benefits associated
with consuming them. However, Ares et al. [48] argued that if consumers were more
interested in combatting health issues, they could be less sensitive to a higher price. Huang
et al. [45] similarly explained that a negative effect of price on consumer acceptance could
be counteracted by health consciousness. For example, consumers who showed a higher
concern for their personal health were willing to pay more for the health benefits associated
with consuming functional foods [31]. However, it should be noted that, in certain cases,
consumers were only willing to pay a limited premium price. For example, Mirosa and
Mangan-Walker [61] found that Chinese consumers were not willing to pay more than 40%
extra for functional foods, and Menrad [64] found that European consumers would only
pay 30–50% extra for functional foods.
3.1.3. Taste
The effect of taste on consumer acceptance has received considerable attention in
previous studies. Taste or expected taste strongly influences consumers’ functional food
choices [30,47]. For example, a study conducted in 2020 by Narayana et al. [50] found
that taste was one of the most important motives for consuming functional foods among
Sri Lankan consumers. In many cases, the influence of taste might surpass the influence
of health benefits [65] as several studies have confirmed consumers’ unwillingness to
compromise on taste for health benefits [28,65,66]. As Verbeke [67] argued, it is highly risky
to assume that consumers would accept functional foods that are not tasty.
3.1.4. Brand
Previous studies have also found that brand can strongly influence consumers’ func-
tional food choices [48,61,68]. Often, consumers are more likely to accept functional foods
if they are familiar with the brand selling the product [48,61]. For example, Mirosa and
Mangan-Walker [61] found that Chinese consumers most preferred to purchase functional
foods from a foreign brand, followed by a well-known brand, and least preferred to pur-
chase from a brand that was not familiar to them. Another study reported that consumers
with knowledge about the leading brands tended to consume more functional foods [61].
However, Ares et al. [48] suggested that consumers who were more health conscious were
inclined to consume functional foods that were not familiar to them.
3.1.5. Health Information

The presentation of health information on functional food labels has been identified
as a major determinant influencing consumer acceptance of functional foods [69]. There-
fore, certain health information on food labels may improve consumers’ perceptions of
health benefits and positively influence their acceptance [70]. Specifically, González-Díaz
et al. [71] found that health information, such as the type of added functional ingredients
and how they benefit human health, may lead to higher purchase intentions. Ahn et al. [72]
explained that less informed consumers who did not fully understand the health attributes
of functional products were unwilling to consume functional foods. Furthermore, Marette
et al. [70] found that health information about the benefits of lowering cholesterol increased
consumers’ purchase intentions for a fortified yogurt drink, and Markosyan et al. [73] found
that potential health benefits information about antioxidants positively influenced con-
sumers’ willingness to purchase functional foods. Additionally, Verneau et al. [32] found
a positive relationship between providing information about the benefit of lycopene and
consumers’ willingness to pay for lycopene-enriched products. Thus, providing accurate
and objective health information about the efficacy of functional properties or attributes
may increase consumers’ acceptance.
However, it should be noted that providing information about scientific uncertainty
may reduce consumers’ willingness to purchase functional foods [70]. In addition, Ares
et al. [33] explored the influence of using the functional ingredients’ name (common name
vs. scientific name) on consumers’ healthiness perceptions and willingness to consume
functional milk desserts. They found that using the common names (e.g., fiber, antioxidants)
could increase consumers’ healthiness perceptions and their willingness to try functional
food compared to using the scientific name (e.g., b-glucan, flavonoids).
A health claim—a common type of health information—has been described as a
statement about the health benefits associated with consuming functional foods. Providing
specific health claims may lead to increased product attractiveness, help consumers to link
the health benefits with the effect, and eventually increase purchase intentions [27,33,48].
However, it has been reported that, in some cases, the format of health claims and their
content may influence consumers’ preferences [20,35,74]. For instance, Van Kleef et al. [57]
found that consumers preferred to consume functional foods when the health claim of
the products involved reducing the risk of physiologically-based illnesses (reduction of
cardiovascular disease and osteoporosis) when compared with psychologically-based
health problems (reduction of stress and fatigue). Likewise, Siegrist et al. [75] found
consumers were more inclined to purchase functional foods with physiological health
claims (e.g., reduction of risk for cancer, reduction of risk for osteoporosis) compared with
psychological health claims (e.g., reduction in lack of concentration, reduction of tiredness).
Finally, Verbeke et al. [58] compared consumers’ intent to purchase functional foods with
different types of health claims (e.g., nutrition claim, health claim, reduction of disease risk
claim) and found that consumers had lower purchase intention for functional foods with a
reduction of disease risk claim compared to those with nutrition and health claims.
3.2. Socio-Demographic Characteristics

Socio-demographic characteristics play a crucial role in consumers’ acceptance of func-
tional foods [26,43,49,53,76–79]. The reviewed studies indicated the determinants included
age, gender, educational level, household characteristics, geography and nationality, and
marital status.
3.2.1. Age
A number of studies have explored the influence of age on consumer acceptance.
However, the findings were inconsistent. Several studies reported that older people were
typically the primary consumers of functional foods (e.g., [32,60,75]). For example, de Jong
et al. [80] found that people aged 65 years or older had a higher preference for many kinds of
functional foods (e.g., yogurt with lactic acid bacteria). Some studies suggested that this was
because they pay more attention to health issues than their younger counterparts [60,75].
However, other studies found younger people—aged 25 and below—were more interested
in functional foods than their older counterparts (e.g., [81,82]). Carrillo et al. [83] attributed
young peoples’ interest in consuming functional foods to their open-mindedness and
willingness to try novelty foods. Similarly, other studies noted that young adults are an
important future consumer group of functional foods. As examples, Carrillo et al. [83]
found individuals between the ages of 18 and 34 to be potential functional food consumers
and Markovina et al. [40] found individuals between the ages of 19 and 30 to be potential
consumers in the future.
3.2.2. Gender
Most studies reached a consensus about the influence of gender on functional foods
acceptance. Specifically, they found that female consumers were more likely to consume
functional foods than males [25,32,60,81]. A possible explanation for these results may be
that women tend to have the primary role of purchasing and preparing foods for their
family [59,79]. We found one study, conducted by Kljusuric et al. [49], which reported
that female consumers from Coastal Croatia were not willing to pay increased prices for
functional foods.
3.2.3. Educational Level

Research has also found that educational level has a significant effect on consumer
acceptance. Results from most studies indicated that educated people showed a greater
intention to purchase functional foods [18,25,26,60,84–86]. For instance, Çakiroğlu and
Uçar [81] found university graduates had a higher likelihood to consume functional foods,
and de Jong et al. [80] concluded that, in general, education was associated with higher
consumption of functional foods. Other researchers, however, observed that individuals
with higher education levels tended to reject consuming functional foods, which could
mean that people are not familiar with some functional foods’ health benefits, even though
they have a higher level of education [29].
3.2.4. Household Characteristics

Previous studies indicated that consumers’ household characteristics (e.g., income,
household size) were relevant socio-demographic determinants that influence functional
food acceptance. Results from the reviewed studies suggested that a higher income level
was often positively associated with higher purchase intentions [18,62,82,87]. This could
be explained in the sense that consumers with a higher income have the ability to spend
more money on functional foods [83]. In terms of household characteristics, families
with young children [63,77] or teenagers [58,88] were also more likely to purchase func-
tional foods. Additional studies investigated the influence of household size on consumer
acceptance [25,77]. For example, Markovina et al. [40] found that families with small house-
hold sizes were more willing to buy functional foods than those with larger household
sizes. However, other studies found that an increased number of household members was
positively associated with functional foods consumption [25,77].
3.2.5. Nationality and Geographic Location

Consumers’ functional food acceptance can also be determined by geographical con-
text and nationality [49]. For example, a study that examined geographical differences in
consumers’ willingness to purchase functional foods found Croatian consumers from dif-
ferent geographical regions (e.g., interior versus the coastal areas) had different purchasing
behaviors of functional foods [49]. In addition, Markosyan et al. [73] found consumers
in Seattle, Washington, were less likely to pay a premium for functional products when
compared to consumers in Spokane, Washington. Regarding the influence of consumers’
nationality, Bech-Larsen and Grunert [34] examined consumers’ attitude toward func-
tional foods in the U.S., Denmark, and Finland. They found consumers in the U.S. and
Denmark were less inclined to buy functional foods when compared to consumers in
Finland [34]. Another study conducted by Labrecque et al. [89] found that French students
who were skeptical about health information printed on functional food labels expressed
less favorable attitudes toward functional foods when compared to French Canadian stu-
dents. Furthermore, a comparison study of German and Chinese consumers found Chinese
consumers had higher preferences for functional foods with health benefit claims than
German consumers [27]. This could be attributed to skepticism among German consumers
regarding the functional properties associated with the health benefit claims [27]. Given
the traditional Chinese nutritional medicine culture, the idea that food may offer specific
health benefits was much more prevalent in China, which could cause Chinese consumers
to be more trusting of the health benefits (e.g., preventing certain diseases; [27]).
3.2.6. Marital Status

Two of the reviewed studies discussed the influence of marital status on consumer
acceptance. Bekoglu et al. [85] found consumers who were single were more likely to con-
sume functional foods than married consumers, whereas Moro et al. [77] found consumers
who were married or widowed were more willing to pay for functional foods than single
or divorced consumers.
3.3. Psychological Characteristics

Psychological characteristics play a critical role in consumers’ decision-making pro-
cesses toward functional food choices. This scoping review identified seven psychological
factors that influence consumers’ acceptance of functional foods, including health con-
sciousness, motivations, perceptions, beliefs, attitudes, trust and food neophobia, and
nutrition knowledge.
3.3.1. Health Consciousness

Health consciousness has been described as the degree to which individuals are aware
of their health and tend to pursue health behaviors to maintain or improve their health
status [90]. A positive relationship between heath consciousness and functional food
purchase intention has been identified in previous studies (e.g., [45,47,66]). Specifically,
the higher the level of health consciousness or concern consumers have, the stronger their
intentions are to consume functional foods [45,47,55,66,91]. For example, consumers who
cared more about their health status and diet tended to consume functional foods [36,92].
Similarly, consumers who expressed fear of cancer were more likely to purchase selenium
enriched functional foods than those who were not frightened of cancer [93]. Kavoosi-
Kalashami et al. [77] also found that consumers who had family members diagnosed with
diabetes were inclined to pay higher prices for functional foods which included dietary
sugar. Furthermore, Devcich et al. [42] found that individuals with higher levels of modern
health worries (e.g., worrying about health risks from food additives, worrying about
antibiotics in food) were willing to buy functional foods. Other studies have suggested that
consumers who are concerned about their family members’ health status were interested
in consuming functional foods [38,80]. For instance, Bui et al. [38] and Verbeke [80] found
that having ill family member(s) or sick relative(s) may increase consumers’ functional
food consumption.
3.3.2. Motivations
Consumers’ health motivation has been identified as one of the most important internal
motivations to consume functional foods. Health motivation is defined as “consumers’
goal-directed arousal to engage in preventive health behaviors” [94] (p. 210). Studies
have found consumers health motivations (e.g., improving health, preventing the risk
of certain diseases) determined their functional foods consuming intentions. The more
health consciousness consumers were, the more they were motivated to consume functional
foods [93,95]. For example, Chinese consumers who placed a greater importance on their
mobility health—the ability of bones, joints, and muscles to function—were more willing to
purchase functional foods to prevent mobility-related illnesses [61]. The more consumers
considered eating healthy foods the greater their willingness was to purchase functional
foods [61]. Similarly, Chang et al. [44] found that consumers who valued health, were
health-oriented, and were interested in eating healthy food expressed higher purchase
intentions toward functional beverage products.
We also identified additional internal motivations that may increase consumers’ accep-
tance of functional foods in the reviewed studies. For example, consumers who considered
functional food as convenient (e.g., providing a “quick and easy” way to improve health),
and those who believed that functional foods could ensure their standard of health tended
to consume functional foods [25,96]. Several studies also revealed that consumers’ self-
efficacy [93,97,98] and self-esteem [95] were important motivators for functional food
consumption. Specifically, consumers could be motivated to consume functional foods if
they felt confident in their ability to do so [93].
In addition to consumers’ internal motivations (e.g., health consciousness, health value,
self-efficacy, self-esteem), several studies examined external social context factors that may
stimulate consumers’ intention to consume functional foods. These factors, including social
prestige, social norms, and subjective norms, represent social pressure or peer influence
on purchase behavior. For example, Barauskaite et al. [99] found that the act of consumers
purchasing products signals to their peers that they care about their personal health and
well-being. Similarly, Nystrand and Olsen [97] found that social pressure (descriptive and
injunctive norms) was a strong predictor of Norwegian consumers’ intent to purchase
functional foods. In addition, Nguyen et al. [100] found that subjective norm was positively
correlated with consumers’ intention to purchase functional foods in Vietnam, which aligns
with results from Rezai et al. [101] who found that subjective norms had a positive effect on
consumers’ acceptance of functional foods. Furthermore, Phuong and Dat [102] asserted
that the higher social prestige, the higher consumers intent was to purchase functional
foods. Barauskaite et al. [99] also investigated social motivations behind the consumption
of functional foods and found that consumers’ tendency for conspicuous consumption was
positively associated with self-reported purchase rate of functional foods.
3.3.3. Perceptions
Consumers may consume functional food if such food is perceived as healthy [34,88].
For example, Rezai et al. [101] found that consumers who perceived greater benefits from
functional foods (e.g., reducing the risk of health problems, improving skin conditions,
providing daily nutrition) were more accepting of functional foods. Another study found
that consumers’ purchase intentions toward functional foods increased if they perceived
the healthfulness of the products to be personally relevant to their health status [41].
Likewise, Jahn et al. [46] tested a conceptual model of consumers’ purchase intention
toward Vitamin D fortified food and found their perceived personal benefit of consuming
Vitamin D functional foods influenced their acceptance of such products. Finally, Xin and
Seo’s [103] study revealed that consumers’ intention to purchase Korean functional foods
was influenced by their perceived behavioral control. Specifically, if consumers perceived it
to be easy for them to purchase functional foods (e.g., having time to buy functional foods,
knowing where to by functional foods), then they tended to accept functional foods.
3.3.4. Beliefs
Beliefs are another psychological determinant that may affect consumer acceptance
of functional foods. In general, the more health benefits consumers believe functional
foods offer, the more likely they are to accept functional foods [38,39,89]. Previous stud-
ies have demonstrated that consumers who believed functional foods could improve
their well-being and quality of life were inclined to accept functional foods [86,98]. For
example, Vecchio et al. [98] found consumers were more willing to purchase omega-3
enriched mozzarella if they believed health benefits included preventing cardiovascular
and rheumatic diseases. Results from other studies indicated that consumers who be-
lieved in the value and benefit of functional foods for personal health were more likely
to accept them [31,80]. For example, Corso et al. [87] found consumers were inclined to
accept antioxidant-enriched soluble coffee if they believed health benefits of the product
included obtaining the recommended daily intake of certain components or helping them
take control of their health.
3.3.5. Attitudes
Attitudes typically predict behavior [104]. Many studies have found that consumers’
attitudes guided their overall evaluation of possible consequences of consuming func-
tional foods [37,46,96]. Consumers who have positive attitudes toward functional foods
were more willing to consume functional foods than those whose attitudes were not posi-
tive [55,102,105]. On a related note, Kavoosi-Kalashami et al. [77] found consumers’ healthy
purchase attitudes and their attitudes toward health benefits of consuming dietary sugar
had a positive significant effect on their willingness to pay for dietary sugar functional
foods. Finally, Szakály et al. [18] suggested that consumers who had more positive attitudes
toward functional foods were more willing to pay a premium for the products if they
believed the functional foods had health benefits.
Previous studies have identified many factors that influence consumers’ attitudes
toward functional foods [40,42,100,106]. For example, Chen [106] found consumers who
were more health conscious had a more positive attitude toward functional foods and were
more willing to consume such foods. Other studies conducted more recently found similar
results indicating health consciousness influences consumers’ attitudes toward functional
foods [45,100]. Likewise, Devcich et al. [42] and Chen [106] stated that people who had
modern health worries expressed a more positive attitude toward functional foods, which
increased their willingness to consume them. Markovina et al. [40] also identified a variety
of factors that influenced young Croatia consumers’ attitudes toward functional foods—
health awareness and confidence, lack of trust for functional foods, and perceived price
and quality ratio. Nguyen et al. [100] similarly reported that perceived price influenced
consumers’ attitudes toward functional foods. Specifically, they found perceived price of
functional yogurt had a negative impact. Finally, Jung et al. [47] found that perceived taste
was positively correlated with U.S. consumers’ attitudes toward functional antioxidant-
enriched foods.
Attitude is a multifaceted concept that consists of hedonic and utilitarian dimen-
sions [107,108]. The hedonic attributes, or values of functional foods pertaining to taste
pleasures or enjoyments, provide sensation experiences for consumers, and the utilitarian
values, or benefits of functional food, offer health-related benefits [97,109]. Nystrand and
Olsen [97] found Norwegian consumers’ attitudes toward consuming functional foods were
positively influenced by utilitarian values and negatively influenced by hedonic values.
Urala and Lähteenmäki [7] developed a scale to evaluate consumers’ attitude toward
functional foods to better predict their acceptance. The scale contains four distinct dimen-
sions: reward from consuming functional foods, necessity for functional foods, confidence
in functional foods, and safety of functional foods. It was used in several of the reviewed
studies to evaluate consumers’ attitudes toward functional foods [39,83,85,92]. These stud-
ies concluded that consumers who perceived more reward from consuming functional
foods, believed functional foods were necessary, were confident in functional foods, and
perceived higher safety of functional foods had a positive attitude toward functional foods
and were more willing to consume them [39,83,85,92].
3.3.6. Trust and Food Neophobia

Functional food is a type of novel food that does not have a long history of consump-
tion. The process of producing functional food (e.g., adding new or unusual ingredients)
uses food technology that is relatively unfamiliar to consumers. The novel, unfamiliar
technology may cause consumers to be skeptical or reluctant to adopt some functional
foods [17,110]. In addition, functional foods are designed to improve health conditions or
reduce the risk of health problems, but it is difficult for consumers to verify concrete and
tangible health effects at the point of consumption. Therefore, the degree of consumers’
trust, a complex psychological factor, may influence consumer acceptance of functional
foods [61].
Consumers tend to accept functional foods if the perceived health benefits outweigh
the perceived risk. For example, Huang et al. [45] found that Chinese consumers who
trusted entities involved in the food system (e.g., governments, food manufacturers, food
retailers) tended to purchase functional foods. Additionally, the degree of trust in food
science [32], the food industry [76], and food safety control systems [36] affected con-
sumers’ willingness to purchase functional foods. Results from Shan et al.’s [111] study
indicated that consumers were skeptical about the health effects from processed functional
meat products.
In addition, the importance of trust in advertising was highlighted in several stud-
ies [54,91,112]. For instance, consumers preferred to purchase functional foods if they
received health information from channels perceived as credible [54]. Sandmann et al. [91]
found that consumers perceived professional health care organizations (e.g., physicians
and health insurance companies) to be some of the most credible sources of information.
Another study conducted by Melbye et al. [112] found that the physical features of an en-
dorser (a person used in an advertising) on a functional energy drink influenced consumers’
assessment of the health-related benefits. Specifically, if advertising was communicated by
a person with a lean figure (e.g., sportier person), consumers considered the health benefits
to be more credible. In addition, Chinese consumers tended to trust information advertised
or publicized through authoritative figures, including published scientists and political
leaders [61].
Food neophobia has been used to predict consumers’ tendency to avoid the use of
novel foods [89,113,114] as food-neophobic individuals are skeptical and hesitant to try
novel foods [115]. In terms of the influence of food neophobia on consumers’ acceptance
of functional foods, the reviewed studies suggested that, to a certain degree, consumers
demonstrated a food-neophobic attitude toward adopting functional foods. For example,
studies conducted in Europe found that food neophobia had a direct negative effect on
consumers’ attitude toward adopting functional foods [32,116], but others argued that the
effect was indirect. Huang et al. [45], for example, found that food neophobia moderates
the relationship between Chinese consumers’ trust of food systems and purchase attitude
toward functional foods. In addition, Moons et al.’s [66] study conducted in Belgium found
that food neophobia only negatively influenced foodies’ intent to adopt functional foods.
Foodies refer to people interested in novel food and its health- and/or environmental-
related benefits [66]. However, food neophobia did not influence the intent of sporting
individuals, or individuals who “are interested in the positive effects of food consumption
on their health, physical performances and body shape” [66] (p. 155). Food neophobia
also had no effect on vegetarians, or individuals who “abstain from the consumption of
meat, and eventually from by-products of animal slaughter” [66] (p. 155). Siegrist et al. [27]
further found that food neophobia had a negative effect on Chinese consumers’ willingness
to buy functional foods, but it did not affect German consumers’ willingness to purchase
such foods.
3.3.7. Nutrition Knowledge

Nutrition knowledge is defined as “a scientific construct that nutrition educators have
created to represent individual’s cognitive processes related to information about food and
nutrition” [117] (p. 239). Adequate nutrition knowledge could change dietary attitudes and
habits, and ultimately influence their acceptance [89,118]. According to a review about con-
sumer motivations and expectations about functional foods, nutritional knowledge severs
as the most important factor influencing consumer acceptance of functional foods [119]. In
addition, Stojanovic et al. [63] found that higher levels of knowledge about health informa-
tion positively affected consumers’ frequency of consuming functional foods. Similarly, La

Barbera et al. [116] found that consumers with higher levels of knowledge about functional
foods tended to pay higher premium prices for functional foods than those with lower
levels of knowledge. Several other studies also confirmed the positive effect of knowledge
on consumers’ functional foods acceptance [25,78,80,103]. A study conducted by Verneau
et al. in 2019 [32] identified knowledge as a moderator between information shock and
willingness to purchase functional foods. Specifically, people with less knowledge about
functional foods increased their likelihood of buying functional foods after they received
information about their health benefits. Similarly, Lu [56] found that consumers’ level of
knowledge moderated their perception of the carrier–ingredient fit, or level of perceived
‘naturalness’ of the carrier–ingredient combination, and thus their purchase intentions.
Conversely, Verbeke [80] found that consumers’ level of knowledge had a negative effect
on their acceptance of functional foods.
3.4. Behavioral Characteristics

Consumers’ behavioral characteristics have been regularly used to investigate how
consumers choose healthy foods. Previous studies demonstrated that individuals who
were health conscious tended to engage in health-related behaviors (e.g., adopting a
healthy lifestyle; [120,121]). For example, several studies found consumers who had a
heathier lifestyle (e.g., consuming natural foods, maintaining life equilibrium, and exer-
cising [77,92,106,121]; and who tended to engage in health-related behaviors (e.g., being
physically active [43], taking nutraceuticals or dietary supplements [66,86], or demonstrat-
ing concern for their body image ([61] and Moro et al. [77])) tended to accept functional
foods compared to those who did not. Additionally, de Jong et al. [80] compared lifestyles
between Dutch functional food consumers and non-consumers and found a relationship
between moderate or high vegetable intake and functional food consumption. In addition,
de Jong et al. [80] found smokers were more likely to consume cholesterol-lowing mar-
garines, and Rezai et al. [82] found that consumers who subscribed to cooking or health
magazines, were vegetarians, and who had experience in a food production company were
more aware of functional foods. Peng et al. [88] also found consumers who previously
consumed calcium- or vitamin-enriched milk or orange juice were more likely to accept
conjugated linoleic acid-enriched dairy products. Finally, Bekoglu et al. [85] and Carrillo
et al. [83] found that consumers who were more innovative, meaning they tended to seek
novelty products, were interested in consuming functional foods.
3.5. Physical Characteristics

Physical characteristics pertain to related to individuals’ body condition or feature
resulting from physical development. It is well known anecdotally that, if people have
experienced physical health issues, they will most likely be more concerned about con-
suming healthy foods. This concept has also been tested empirically in the functional
food domain. For example, Landström et al. [86] found that Swedish consumers who
had a diet-related problem (e.g., high blood pressure, high cholesterol, or diabetes) were
interested in consuming cholesterol-lowering functional foods. Likewise, Chen [106] found
consumers who reported more subjective health complaints (e.g., flu, musculoskeletal pain,
pseudoneurology, gastrointestinal problems, allergies, etc.) had positive attitudes toward
functional foods and were inclined to consume such foods. In addition, Brečić et al. [25]
found a positive relationship between consumers’ self-reported body mass index and
their functional foods consumption. This could be because consumers with a higher body
mass index may be seeking to change their unhealthy lifestyle and, therefore, consume
more functional foods [25,84]. Another study conducted by de Jong et al. [80] revealed that
consumers with poor subjective health were inclined to use cholesterol-lowering margarine.
4. Discussion
Our scoping review identified a wide range of determinants and sub-determinants
affecting consumer responses to functional foods. It should be noted that the extent to
which determinants influence consumer acceptance may interact with other determinants
dynamically. As mentioned earlier, findings from previous studies were not consistent, nor
were the relationships among these determinants always consistent or significant. Thus, it is
difficult to establish the existence of direct or linear relationships among these determinants.
Instead, there are a number of determinants that influence consumer acceptance collectively.
The complexity of the determinants and inconsistency of findings proposed challenges for
drawing generalized conclusions about the extent and accurate direction of the variables’
influence on consumer behavior. This scoping review attempted to describe general trends
as they relate to consumers’ acceptance of functional foods by synthesizing some of the
most robust and comprehensive findings that have been reported in the literature.
Before launching novel products, it is important to explore the influence of product
characteristics on consumer preferences. Scientists and functional food manufacturers
should carefully consider how to choose functional carrier ingredients and set pricing.
Because functional foods improve consumer health and well-being, and because consumers
purchase functional foods with this in mind, they tend to be more accepting of healthier
carriers (e.g., yogurt; [34,57,58]. Perhaps consumers perceive that the use of less healthy
carriers (e.g., ice cream, sausage, etc.) counteracts or diminishes the effect of the functional
ingredient on their health. Still, additional research is needed to investigate consumer
responses to functional foods that use less healthy carriers. It is possible that these products
could appeal to subpopulations of consumers who tend to eat less healthily and who
have not yet accepted functional foods as a part of their diet. In addition, sensory studies
on product taste should be conducted early in the research and development process, as
our findings revealed that as sensory preferences are likely the critical driver influencing
functional food consumption. Consumers are also more likely to pay a premium to pur-
chase functional foods associated with improvements in household health, particularly
in differing phases of human development and post-disease diagnoses for members of
their household.
Communications and marketing professionals in the industry should carefully con-
sider how to design labels, position brands, and develop advertising campaigns. According
to results from the reviewed studies, functional food product labels should accurately and
precisely communicate information about the type of functional ingredient and its benefits
to human health [32,70,71,73]. Providing this type of health information on labels can
significantly increase consumers’ acceptance. It is important that future research seek to
determine the situations and contexts in which certain health claims are more effective at
increasing consumer acceptance than others. For example, physiological health claims and
psychological health claims have prompted various consumer responses. Thus, revealing
additional evidence to inform when, where, and for whom certain health information is
most appropriate will ensure that communications and marketing professionals in the in-
dustry design effective product labels and deliver other compelling promotional materials.
In addition, because branding can influence consumer acceptance of functional
foods [48,61], it is important that communications and marketing professionals work-
ing for functional food companies prioritize positioning the company’s brand to create
brand associations in the minds of consumers who constitute their target audience. As a
result, their target audience should be able to distinguish how the brand differs from com-
petitors. More effective branding could increase consumers’ familiarity, thereby increasing
their acceptance [48,61]. This can be accomplished by implementing a brand positioning
strategy after comprehensively understanding the functional foods market, which this
scoping review can help professionals in the industry achieve.
Another aspect of marketing that influences consumer acceptance of functional food
is advertising, especially as it relates to trust and credibility [54,91,112]. Marketing pro-
fessionals working for functional food companies should consider using health care pro-
fessionals [91], scientists [61], or healthy-looking individuals who appear to be exercise

conscious [112] in functional food advertising campaigns and associated promotional mate-
rials. Because consumers perceive individuals in these roles as credible and trustworthy,
functional food companies should rely on them to share the company’s message.
It should be noted that previous studies investigating the effect of socio-demographic
characteristics on consumers’ functional food acceptance were inconsistent in their findings.
As a result, it is difficult to generalize the demographic characteristics of functional food
consumers legitimately, since the various studies reviewed implemented different types
of functional products, methods, and populations. Nevertheless, different demographic
groups may prefer different types of functional foods [26]. In addition, consumers’ food
choices may be influenced by their nationality. Thus, researchers in the functional food
domain should note that findings from one geographic area or cultural group may not be
applicable to other geographic or cultural contexts. Therefore, when releasing functional
foods to the consumer market, socio-demographic characteristics should be carefully
considered to target specific consumer groups.
Furthermore, our findings suggest that the relationship between psychological de-
terminants and consumer acceptance of functional foods is important, but complex. The
psychological determinants are interdependent and correlated. There is a conscious or un-
conscious psychological response when consumers purchase new functional food products.
Among the psychological determinants, consumers’ health consciousness exerts a positive
impact on consumer acceptance. In addition, a positive relationship between consumers’
perceptions regarding the health benefits of functional foods and their acceptance were
identified in previous studies [41,101]. Likewise, consumers who believe the health benefits
of consuming functional food are likely to use functional foods. Furthermore, consumers’
attitudes are influenced by many factors and vary based on consumers’ cultural context.
Thus, understanding the sub-determinants collectively could help consumers develop
positive attitudes toward using functional foods and, ultimately, increase their acceptance.
For example, emphasizing the rewards and the necessity of using functional foods may
cultivate consumers’ positive attitudes toward functional foods [92].
Regarding trust and food neophobia, as functional foods are produced by adding
or changing healthful ingredients, consumers may perceive consuming such foods as a
possible risk due to being less familiar with the technology and potential unknown conse-
quences of consuming food produced using the technology [17,110]. However, consumers
tend to accept functional foods if the perceived health benefits outweigh the perceived
risk. Therefore, consumers’ suspicion and distrust could be alleviated if they become more
familiar with the health benefits that functional foods provide. In addition to providing
this information on product labels, as previously noted, further efforts should be made to
inform and educate consumers about health benefits that result from consuming functional
foods. It can be assumed that consumers are more likely to purchase functional foods if
appropriate information about the health benefits is provided [32,70–73].
Similarly, because consumers’ knowledge pertaining to functional foods can influence
their perceptions and purchase behavior toward such products, educating consumers to
increase their knowledge about the health benefits of consuming functional foods could also
be an effective way to improve their health awareness and consciousness. Once consumers
have common knowledge about how to evaluate health benefits from functional foods, their
acceptance may increase [122,123]. In addition, functional food industry experts should
inform consumers about functional food processing and production technology. Doing so
could alleviate consumers’ concerns about adverse side effects and increase their trust and
confidence in functional food production institutions and food technologies.
The behavioral characteristics we identified in the reviewed studies may help scientists
and other functional food experts understand why consumers prefer to choose functional
foods rather than conventional foods. Generally, consumers who adopt a healthy lifestyle
or engage in health-promoting behaviors tend to accept functional foods to maintain
their well-being. Additionally, consumers who previously consumed functional foods
and consumers who seek novelty products tend to accept functional foods. However,
these behavioral characteristics are influenced by conscious and unconscious motives [121].
Therefore, based on the limited number of studies we included in our review, it is difficult to
confirm an association between consumers’ behavioral characteristics and their acceptance
of functional foods. Still, these findings can provide insight into the consumer groups that
communications and marketing professionals in the industry should considering targeting
when launching new functional foods or promoting existing functional foods.
Finally, consumers with certain physical characteristics (e.g., diet-related health prob-
lems, subjective health complaints, higher body mass index, or poor subjective health) are
inclined to consume functional foods. In the studies we reviewed, we found evidence
to suggest consumers who have certain physical characteristics accept functional foods,
likely because they seek healthy foods that can improve their health status. Therefore, our
previous recommendation to emphasize the health benefits of consuming functional foods,
specifically how they can help improve consumers’ physical ailments, could be an effective
communications strategy to increase consumers acceptance of functional foods.
Limitations and Future Recommendations

This scoping review was conducted to identify and synthesize prominent determinants
that influence consumers’ acceptance of functional foods and attempts to integrate the
contradictory and inconsistent research findings. However, some limitations need to
be acknowledged and can be addressed in future research. First, studies included in
the scoping review were limited to four databases. Studies that investigate consumers’
acceptance of functional foods might exist in other databases. Therefore, other factors
related to consumer acceptance may exist that are not identified in this review. Future
research should build upon this scoping review by using additional databases to search for
other determinants that influence consumer acceptance of functional foods.
Second, an important limitation is the heterogeneity across studies included in this
review. The studies included used a variety of instruments and scales, methodologies,
types of functional foods, and outcome measurements. The heterogeneity of methods and
measurements applied in the reviewed studies limited us to perform a quality assessment
for the included studies. Therefore, it is possible that if future researchers conduct a similar
review and only include studies that use standardized measurement or a consistent research
design, they may be able to conduct a quality assessment. However, a quality assessment
is not mandatory for scoping reviews [23]. In addition, we recommend researchers conduct
systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the future to investigate important determinants
influencing consumer acceptance.
Third, the review attempted to synthesize the determinants that have causal relation-
ships with consumers’ acceptance through observable and numerical measurements. Thus,
only quantitative studies were included and analyzed. Additionally, the studies included
focused on modified or altered functional foods instead of whole functional foods, which
helps to create a clear distinction from conventional foods. Additionally, all populations
investigated in the reviewed studies were 18 years and older, so participants were food
purchasers and contributed to the public health perspective. Studies that focused on a
specific population (e.g., women, older people, children, comparisons between children and
adults) were not included in the scoping review because we sought to provide information
that can be generalized well to the general population as opposed to specific populations.
Finally, the studies included in this scoping review were limited to those published in
English and in peer-reviewed journals. In summary, findings described herein can enable
those working with functional foods to better predict public acceptance toward different
types of functional products in varied contexts. They can also provide key insights to
develop effective communication strategies that may ultimately increase public acceptance
of functional foods and improve the health of many consumer groups.
5. Conclusions
Given the competitive nature of the functional foods market and consumers’ complex
process of accepting novel foods, an understanding of the determinants that influence
consumer acceptance and their relationships is key to a successful product launch and
development of marketing strategies for the novel functional foods industry. Based on a
review of 75 studies conducted around the globe that empirically investigated consumers’
acceptance of functional foods, our scoping review identified a wide range of determinants,
and we classified the determinants into five categories, which are product characteristics,
socio-demographic characteristics, psychological characteristics, behavioral characteristics,
and physical characteristics. We attempted to provide insights for leaders and scientists in
product development, and for communications and marketing specialists in the industry
who serve as the liaison between functional foods and the public. Therefore, these five
categories of prominent determinants should be considered and used to inform the research
of scholars working in the functional food domain and, ultimately, to inform the successful
launch of novel functional foods.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.T.B.; Methodology, M.T.B. and P.L.; Data collection and
analysis, P.L. and J.A.P.; Writing—review and editing, M.T.B., P.L., J.A.P. and H.R.L. All authors have
read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Appendix A
Table A1. Characteristics and key findings of included studies.
Categories
Authors Year Research Method Functional Foods Continent Sample Size Key Findings Outcomes
(Determinants)
(a) Providing health claims was necessary
for consumers to link health benefits to
functional foods’ effect on their health,
and eventually increase their purchase (a) Product
intentions; Compared to using scientific characteristics (health
Functional milk names (b-glucan or flavonoids), the use of information).
Ares et al. [33] 2009 Conjoint study Europe 82 Willingness to try
desserts’ images common names (fiber or antioxidants) (b) Socio-demographic
could increase consumers’ health characteristics
perceptions and their willingness to try (age, gender)
functional food. (b) Older people and
females were more willing to try
functional foods.
(a) Not fully understanding health
(a) Product
Red ginseng attributes of functional foods was one of Preferences and
Ahn et al. [72] 2016 Choice experiment Asia 240 characteristics
concentrates the major barriers for consuming willingness to pay
(health information)
functional foods.
(a) Product
(a) Consumers were more likely to accept
characteristics
functional foods if they perceived the
(carrier/ingredient
Functional food carrier to be healthy. (b) Different
Ares et al. [53] 2007 Survey Europe 200 combination). Willingness to try
concept socio-demographic (age, gender) groups
(b) Socio-demographic
had different preferences toward
characteristics
functional foods.
(age, gender)
(a) Price had a significantly negative
(a) Product
Yogurts enriched effect on consumers’ consumption of
characteristics (price). Functional
Ares et al. [48] 2010 Conjoint study with antioxidants Europe 103 functional yogurts. (b) Consumers were
(b) Product foods choice
and fiber more likely to accept functional foods if
characteristics(brand)
the brand was familiar to them.
(a) Conspicuous consumption was (a) Psychological
Barauskaite 18 functional Purchase rate of
2018 Survey Europe 900 positively associated with functional characteristics
et al. [99] products functional foods
foods purchase rate. (motivation)
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
(a) The more consumers cared about their
(a) Psychological
health and a healthy diet, the more likely
characteristics (health
Resveratrol- they were to buy functional foods.
Barreiro-Hurlé consciousness).
2008 Choice experiment enriched Europe 300 (b) Consumers who trusted food Willingness to buy
et al. [36] (b) Psychological
red wine technology development and food safety
characteristics (trust in
control were more willing to buy
food technology)
functional foods.
(a) Denmark and U.S. consumers were (a) Socio-demographic
less inclined to accept functional foods characteristics
compared to Finnish consumers. (nationality).
Bech-Larsen & 24 standard Functional
2003 Conjoint study Europe 1553 (b) Consumers considered inherently (b) Product
Grunert [34] full-profile stimuli foods perceptions
wholesome foods (e.g., orange juice, characteristics
yogurt) as being healthier carriers than (carrier/ingredient
unwholesome foods (e.g., spreads). combination)
(a) Consumers with different attitudes
(a) Psychological
Bechtold & Functional (skeptics, advocates, and neutrals) had
2014 Choice experiment Europe 1309 characteristics Willingness to pay
Abdulai [37] dairy product different preferences toward functional
(attitude)
food attributes.
(a) Consumers with a higher educational (a) Socio-demographic
level and who were single were more characteristics
likely to use functional foods. (education, marital
(b) Consumers’ attitudes toward the status).
Concepts about
necessity of functional foods positively (b) Psychological Functional
Bekoglu et al. [85] 2016 Survey different types of Asia 695
influenced their functional food characteristics food consumption
functional foods
consumption. (c) Innovative consumers (attitude).
who had the tendency to seek novelty (c) Behavioral
products were likely to consume characteristics (seek-
functional foods. ing innovativeness)
(a) There was a negative correlation
between consumers’ body image (a) Physical
dissatisfaction and the number of characteristics (body
Functional Functional
Bimbo et al. [68] 2018 Choice experiment Europe 229 functional yogurts they purchased. mass index).
probiotic yogurts food purchased
(b) Consumers who had more knowledge (b) Product
regarding functional yogurt brands characteristics (brand)
purchased more functional foods.
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
(a) Female consumers, older consumers,
(a) Socio-demographic
and consumers with higher levels of
characteristics (gender,
education were likely to consume
age, education,
functional foods; Consumers with a larger
household size).
family were willing to consume
(b) Psychological
functional foods. (b) Consumers who
Functional believed functional foods were healthy Functional
Brečić et al. [25] 2014 Survey Europe 424 motivations).
food concept and convenient were willing to consume food consumption
(c) Physical
them. (c) There was a positive correlation
characteristics (body
between consumers’ self-reported body
mass index).
mass index and their functional food
(d) Psychological
consumption. (d) Nutrition knowledge
characteristics
positively influenced consumers’
(nutrition knowledge)
functional food acceptance.
(a) Product
(a) Young Russian consumers were
characteristics
concerned about the naturalness and
Experimental Anthocyanin- (carrier/ingredient
Bruschi et al. [30] 2015 Europe 207 health properties of functional foods. Willingness to pay
auction containing bakery combination).
(b) Taste was the most important attribute
(b) Product
of functional foods.
characteristics (taste)
(a) Consumers’ high level of acceptance
(a) Psychological
was associated with more perceived
characteristics (beliefs).
Functional benefits from functional foods. (b) The Consumer
Bui et al. [38] 2015 Survey Asia 217 (b) Psychological
food concept presence of an ill family member may acceptance
characteristics
increase consumers’ functional
(health consciousness)
food consumption.
and well-educated consumers are more
likely to consume functional foods.
Büyükkaragöz 12 functional age, educational level). Functional
2014 Survey Asia 808 (b) Price influences consumers’ functional
et al. [60] food items (b) Price. (c) Behavioral food consumption
food consumption. (c) Consumers who
took vitamin supplements were likely to
related behavior)
accept functional foods.
Functional milk and
(a) Consumers between the ages of 18 and (a) Socio-demographic
dairy products;
Çakiroğlu & 25, female consumers, and university characteristics
2018 Survey cereal product; Asia 1182 Purchase intention
Uçar [81] graduates were likely to purchase (age, gender,
beverages; other
functional foods. educational level)
functional products
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
(a) Consumers between the ages of 18 and
35 tended to consume more functional
characteristics (age,
foods; Female consumers were more
gender).
interested in functional foods.
(b) Psychological
Functional (b) Consumers’ positive attitudes (reward, Functional
Carrillo et al. [83] 2013 Survey Europe 197 characteristics
food concept necessity, confidence) and novelty food consumption
(attitude).
positively influenced their functional food
(c) Psychological
consumption. (c) Healthiness and natural
characteristics
content were motives for consumers to
(motivations)
consume functional foods.
(a) Consumers who were health-oriented,
valued health, and interested in eating (a) Psychological
Chang et al. [44] 2020 Survey Functional beverages Asia 213 healthy food had higher purchase characteristics Purchase intention
intentions for functional (motivations)
beverages products.
(a) Psychological
(a) Consumers who had a positive
characteristics
attitude toward functional foods were
(attitude).
willing to buy functional foods. (b) Health
Eight (b) Psychological
Chen [92] 2011a Survey Asia 533 consciousness had a positive influence on Willingness to use
functional foods characteristics (health
consumers’ functional food preferences.
consciousness).
(c) Healthy lifestyle positively influenced
(c) Behavioral charac-
consumers’ functional foods preferences.
teristics (lifestyle)
(a) Consumers who were health
consciousness had more positive attitudes
toward functional foods and were willing (a) Psychological
to use functional foods; Consumers who characteristics
had modern health worries had more (attitude, health
positive attitudes toward functional foods consciousness).
Eight and were willing to consume functional (b) Behavioral
Chen [106] 2011b Survey Asia 633 Willingness to use
functional foods foods. (b) Consumers who lived a characteristics
healthier lifestyle were willing to (lifestyle). (c) Physical
consume functional foods; (c) Consumers characteristics
who reported more subjective health (subjective
complaints had more positive attitudes health complaints)
toward functional foods and were
willingness to use them.
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
(a) Older consumers who had a higher (a) Socio-demographic
educational level and a higher income characteristics (age,
were more likely to accept functional educational level,
Soluble coffee foods. (b) Consumers who believed in the income).
Consumer
Corso et al. [87] 2018 Survey enriched with South America 270 health benefits were more inclined to (b) Psychological
acceptance
antioxidants accept antioxidant-enriched soluble characteristics (beliefs).
coffee. (c) Consumers’ knowledge (c) Psychological
positively influenced their functional characteristics
food acceptance. (knowledge)
(a) Psychological
(a) Consumers who feared cancer were
willing to purchase selenium-enriched
Cox & consciousness). Likelihood
2007 Survey Se-enriched foods Asia 200 foods. (b) Consumers’ self-efficacy was an
Bastiaans [93] (b) Psychological to purchase
important motivator for consuming
characteristics
functional foods.
(motivation)
and consumers with higher levels of
education had a higher preference for
functional foods. (b) There was a
age, educational level).
correlation between consumers’ moderate
Functional (b) Behavioral charac- Use of
de Jong et al. [80] 2003 Survey Europe 1552 or high vegetable intake and functional
food concept teristics(lifestyle). functional foods
food consumption; Smokers were more
(c) Physical
likely to consume cholesterol-lowing
characteristics (poor
margarines. (c) Consumers with poor
subjective health)
subjective health were more inclined to
use cholesterol-lowering margarine.
(a) Consumers’ purchase intentions
toward functional foods increased if their (a) Psychological
Foods with Functional
Dean et al. [41] 2012 Survey Europe 2385 perceived healthiness of the products characteristics
health-related claims food perceptions
were personally relevant to their (perceptions)
health status.
(a) Consumers having modern health
Synthetic additives (a) Psychological
worries expressed a more positive Functional
Devcich et al. [42] 2007 Survey in margarine Oceania 390 characteristics
attitude toward functional foods and food consumption
and yoghurt (health consciousness)
included to consume functional foods.
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
(a) Price negatively affected consumers’
purchase intentions, but this negative effect (a) Product
could be intervened by health consciousness. characteristics (price).
(b) Consumers who were more health (b) Psychological
Functional
Huang et al. [45] 2019 Survey Asia 1144 conscious expressed more positive attitudes characteristics (health Purchase intention
food concept
toward functional foods and were likely to consciousness).
purchase them. (c) Chinese consumers who (c) Psychological
trusted the food system were likely to characteristics (trust)
purchase functional foods.
(a) The functional foods carrier influenced
(a) Product
consumers’ perceptions and purchase
Yogurt, characteristics
intentions. (b) Consumers’ perceived trust Perceived
non-alcoholic (carrier/ingredient
Huang et al. [54] 2020 Survey Asia 1144 in mass media influenced their purchase attractiveness and
beverage, combination).
intentions; Consumers preferred to purchase intention
and biscuits (b) Psychological
purchase functional foods if they received
characteristics (trust)
health information from credible channel.
(a) Psychological
characteristics (attitude).
(a) Positive attitudes toward functional
(b) Psychological
foods, population nutrient deficiency
Vitamin awareness, and perceived
Jahn et al. [46] 2019 Survey Europe 1263 consciousness). Purchase intention
D-fortified food appropriateness of fortified-products
(c) Product
influenced consumers’ decisions to
characteristics
purchase Vitamin D-fortified foods.
(carrier/ingredient
combination)
(a) Consumers who placed a high-level of
(a) Psychological
importance on food quality as a
characteristics
Jeżewska- guarantee of health were willing to
Cereal fortified (motivation). Consumption
Zychowicz & 2015 Survey Europe 1000 consume fiber-enriched functional foods.
with fiber (b) Psychological intentions
Królak [96] (b) Consumers who had positive attitudes
characteristics
toward food technologies were willing to
(attitude)
consume functional foods.
Cholesterol-
lowering spreads, (a) Consumers’ beliefs in functional foods (a) Psychological
Jezewska- probiotic yoghurt, health benefits positively influenced their characteristics (beliefs).
Zychowicz 2009 Survey juice with added Europe 275 acceptance. (b) Consumers’ attitude (b) Psychological Willingness to buy
[39] calcium, low-fat positively influenced their willingness characteristics
mayonnaise, and to buy. (attitude)
energetic beverages
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
(a) Product
(a) Perceived taste was positively
characteristics (taste).
correlated with U.S. consumers’ attitudes
(b) Psychological
Antioxidant-infused toward functional foods. (b) Consumers
characteristics (health Intention to
Jung et al. [47] 2020 Survey sugar-free North America 368 who were more health consciousness had
consciousness). purchase
chewing gum more positive attitudes toward functional
(c) Psychological
foods and were more likely to
characteristics
purchase them.
(attitude)
(a) Consumers’ age, educational level, (a) Socio-demographic
family size, and income affected their characteristics (age,
willingness to pay for functional foods. educational level,
(b) Consumers who had a record of family size, income).
Kavoosi-
Contingent diabetes in their family were willing to (b) Psychological
Kalashami 2017 Dietary sugar Asia 125 Willingness to pay
valuation pay for functional foods with dietary characteristics (health
et al. [76]
sugar. (c) Consumers’ attitudes toward consciousness).
health benefits had a significant direct (c) Psychological
effect on their willingness to pay for characteristics
functional foods with dietary sugar. (attitude)
(a) Consumers’ age, gender, educational
characteristics
Functional level, income, and geographic location Functional
Kljusuric, et al. [49] 2015 Survey Europe 687 (age, gender,
food concept affected their functional foods choice
educational level,
foods consumption.
income, geography)
(a) Consumer groups that differ by
gender and age had different preferences
for functional foods carriers. Female
consumers and older male consumers
preferred cereal products as functional
foods carriers, whereas young males
preferred meat products as functional (a) Socio-demographic
Functional
Kraus et al. [26] 2017 Survey Europe 200 foods carriers; Female consumers were characteristics (age, Purchase intention
food concept
more health-conscious toward functional gender, education)
food carriers and they were
quality-oriented, whereas young male
consumers were less health-consciousness
toward functional foods carriers;
Consumers with a university education
were more interested in functional foods.
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
(a) Consumers who were more motived
(a) Psychological
Functional to improve their health and prevent the Functional
Kraus [95] 2015 Survey Europe 200 characteristics
food concept risk of becoming less healthy were foods consumption
(motivation)
inclined to consume functional foods.
(a) Product
(a) Consumers preferred to purchase
characteristics
functional food product combinations
(carrier/ingredient
that were more familiar to them.
combination).
Seven different (b) Consumers who were more concerned
Krutulyte (b) Psychological
2011 Survey functional Europe 999 about their health had a higher intention Purchase intention
et al. [55] characteristics (health
foods categories to purchase functional foods.
consciousness).
(c) Consumers who had positive attitudes
(c) Psychological
toward functional foods were more
characteristics
willing to purchase them.
(attitude)
(a) Consumers with a higher level of (a) Psychological
knowledge about lycopene tended to pay characteristics
A crushed tomato
La Barbera Experimental a high premium price for functional foods. (knowledge).
2016 enriched Europe 100 Willingness to pay
et al. [116] auction (b) Food neophobia had a direct negative (b) Psychological
with lycopene
effect on consumers’ attitudes toward characteristics
adopting functional foods. (food neophobia)
(a) French Canadian students had (a) Socio-demographic
positive attitudes toward functional foods characteristics
compared to French students who trusted (geography and
the health information on functional nationality).
Eggs with Omega-3, foods less. (b) Believing in the credibility (b) Psychological
Labrecque milk with calcium, of information positively affected characteristics (beliefs).
2006 Survey North America 545 Purchase intention
et al. [89] and orange juice consumers’ functional food acceptance. (c) Psychological
with calcium (c) A high level of knowledge positively characteristics
influenced consumers’ functional food (knowledge).
acceptance. (d) Food neophobia was (d) Psychological
negatively related to consumers’ attitudes characteristics
toward functional foods. (food neophobia)
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
(a) Well-educated consumers had a
greater intention to purchase functional
characteristics
foods. (b) Consumers who tended to
(education).
adopt healthy behavior (i.e., taking
(b) Behavioral
nutraceuticals, taking dietary
supplements) were more likely to accept
Landström Seven functional related behavior). Functional
2007 Survey Europe 972 functional foods. (c) Consumers’ beliefs
et al. [86] food items (c) Psychological food consumption
in the health effect of functional foods
characteristics (beliefs).
were positively correlated to their
(d) Physical
functional food acceptance. (d) Swedish
characteristics
consumers who had a diet-related
(presence of
problem were likely to consume
diet-related problem)
cholesterol-lowering functional foods.
(a) Consumers who cared about (a) Product
The descriptions of carrier–ingredient fitness were more characteristics
30 hypothetical willing to purchase functional foods. (carrier/ingredient
Experimental Study 1 = 62;
Lu [56] 2015 functional foods (six North America (b) Knowledge was a moderator between combination). Purchase intention
study Study 2 = 93
carriers*five func- consumers’ perception of the (b) Psychological
tional ingredients) carrier–ingredient combination and their characteristics
purchase intentions. (knowledge)
(a) Consumers were unwilling to
Experimental (a) Product Use of
Lyly et al. [66] 2007 B-glucan soup Europe 1157 compromise on the taste for
study characteristics (taste) functional foods
health benefits.
(a) Information that details the health
(a) Product
Experimental Yoghurts with added benefits of cholesterol had a positive
Marette et al. [70] 2010 Europe 97 characteristics Willingness to pay
study plant sterols influence on consumers’ willingness
to pay.
(a) Information about the potential health
benefits of antioxidants positively (a) Product
Apples with a influenced consumers’ willingness to pay characteristics (health
Markosyan coating that contains for functional foods. (b) Consumers living information).
2009 Survey North America 730 Willingness to pay
et al. [73] specific flavonoids in Seattle were less likely to pay a (b) Socio-demographic
and antioxidants premium for functional products characteristics
compared to consumers living (geography)
in Spokane.
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
(a) Consumers between the ages of 19 and
30 were inclined consume functional food; (a) Socio-demographic
female consumers living in a smaller characteristics (age,
household with high incomes were gender, size of
Markovina Functional
2011 Survey Europe 1035 willing to purchase functional foods. household, Willingness to buy
et al. [40] food concept
(b) Health awareness, trust, and perceived and income).
price influenced young Croatian (b) Psychological char-
consumers’ attitudes toward acteristics (attitude)
functional food.
(a) The feature of functional energy drink
advertising influences the product
credibility for consumers and product
Experimental Milk-based meal (a) Psychological
Melbye et al. [112] 2015 Europe 100 consumption. If consumers communicate Purchase intention
study replacement drink characteristics (trust)
through a person with lean figure
(sportier, leaner), consumers consider the
health benefits more credible.
(a) Chinese consumers were not
willingness to pay more than 40% extra
(a) Product
for functional foods. (b) Brand highly
characteristics (price).
influenced consumers’ choice of
Juice; milk with (b) Product
functional foods. (c) Consumers who
added calcium; characteristics (brand).
Mirosa & Mangan- placed great importance on their mobility Willingness
2018 Mixed methods muesli bar with Oceania 193 (c) Psychological
Walker [61] health were more willing to purchase to purchase
added protein and characteristics
functional foods to prevent
vitamin D (motivations).
mobility-related illnesses. (d) Consumers
(d) Psychological
trusted information about functional
characteristics (trust)
foods advertised or publicized through
authoritative figures.
(a) Psychological
(a) Health consciousness and taste were characteristics (health
major determinants of consumers’ consciousness).
Spirulina- functional foods adoption. (b) Food (b) Products Functional food
Moons et al. [65] 2018 Survey Europe 1325
enhanced food neophobia negatively influenced foodies’ characteristics (taste). adoption intention
functional food adoption but not that of (c) Psychological
sporting individuals or vegetarians. characteristics
(food neophobia)
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
(a) Consumers between the ages of 45 and 64
were willing to pay for catechin-enriched
yogurt; female consumers had slightly higher
intentions to pay for catechin-enriched
yogurts; consumers’ who completed the
characteristics (i.e., age,
middle and tertiary educational levels, who
A hypothetical gender, educational
were married or widowed, who were part of
yogurt with two level, marital status,
the second lowest and second highest
Moro et al. [77] 2015 Choice experiment functional attributes Europe 600 income, and household Willingness to pay
income brackets, and who lived in a larger
(probiotics and size). (b) Physical
household reported a higher willingness to
catechin enrichment) characteristics.
pay for functional foods. (b) Consumers’
(c) Behavioral charac-
health status (BMI) may be related to their
willingness to pay for catechin-enriched
functional foods. (c) Consumers’ lifestyle
could influence their willingness to pay for
functional foods.
(a) Consumers from Sri Lanka were
concerned about the price of products
(a) Product
Narayana Functional rather than their health benefits. (b) Taste Functional
2020 Survey Asia 307 characteristics
et al. [50] dairy product was one of the most important motives food choice
(price; taste)
for functional food consumption among
Sri Lankan consumers.
(a) Subjective norm was positively
correlated with consumers’ intention to (a) Psychological
purchase functional yogurts. (b) Health characteristics
consciousness influenced consumers’ (motivation).
attitudes and was a significant (b) Psychological
Nguyen et al. [100] 2020 Survey Functional yogurts Asia 596 Purchase intention
determinant of consumers’ willingness to characteristics (health
use functional foods. (c) The perceived consciousness).
price of functional yogurts had a negative (c) Product
influence on consumers’ characteristics (price)
purchase intentions.
(a) Norwegian consumers’ attitudes
(a) Psychological
toward eating functional foods were
characteristics
Milk and other dairy positively influenced by utilitarian values
Nystrand & (attitude). Purchased
2020 Survey products with added Europe 810 and negatively influenced by hedonic
Olsen [97] (b) Psychological intention
vitamin D values. (b) Consumers’ self-efficacy and
characteristics
social pressure were important motivators
(motivations)
for their consumption of functional foods.
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
(a) Female consumers preferred
consuming soymilk, fiber-rich
bread/cookies, and tea, whereas male
consumers preferred consuming
functional breakfast cereals; consumers’
consumption of functional foods was
significantly correlated with their
Skimmed milk, fiber- characteristics (gender,
increasing age; consumers who
rich bread/cookies, age, educational level,
completed a medium education level Functional
Ozen et al. [43] 2013 Survey probiotics, breakfast Europe 1386 and income).
preferred consuming fiber-rich food consumption
cereals and tea with (b) Behavioral
bread/cookies; consumers who had a
functional components characteristics (health-
medium income preferred to consume
related behavior)
breakfast cereals. (b) Physically active
consumers were likely to consume
soymilk, breakfast cereals, probiotics, and
red wine, whereas obese consumers were
less inclined to use breakfast cereals and
fiber-rich bread/cookies.
(a) Consumers who believed in the values
of functional foods and the benefits on (a) Psychological
A new functional
their personal health were more likely to characteristics (Beliefs).
Pappalardo & Experimental snack made with
2016 Europe 156 accept functional foods. (b) Consumers (b) Psychological Willingness to pay
Lusk [31] auction white lupine and
who were concerned about their health characteristics
citrus fiber
were willing to compromise on the price (health consciousness)
of functional foods for the health benefits.
Novel foods (a) Consumers’ attitudes significantly
(a) Psychological char- Intention
Patch et al. [105] 2005 Survey enriched with Oceania 129 influenced their intention to
acteristics (attitude) to consume
Omega-3 fatty acids consume them.
(a) Families with teenagers were more
characteristics
likely to purchase functional foods. (b)
(household standard).
Consumers who perceived the health
(b) Psychological
CLA-enriched benefits of functional foods were likely to Consumer
Peng et al. [88] 2006 Survey North America 803 characteristics
dairy products consume functional foods. (c) Consumers acceptance
(perceptions).
who had previously purchased functional
(c) Behavioral
foods were interested in purchasing
characteristics (health-
functional foods.
related behavior)
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
(a) Psychological
(a) Consumers with positive attitudes
characteristics
toward functional foods had higher
Phuong & (attitude).
2017 Survey Functional yogurts Asia 242 purchase intentions. (b) Consumers with Purchase intention
Dat [102] (b) Psychological
a higher level of social prestige were more
characteristics
likely to purchase functional foods.
(motivation)
(a) Young consumers were more
interested in purchasing functional foods;
consumers with a higher income level
had higher purchase intentions toward
characteristics
Synthetic functional foods. (b) Consumers who
Rezai et al. [82] 2012 Survey Asia 439 (age, income). Purchase intention
functional foods subscribed to cooking or health
(b) Behavioral charac-
magazines, who were vegetarians, and
who had experience working for a food
production company were more aware of
functional foods.
(a) Subjective norms had a positive effect (a) Psychological
on consumers’ intentions to accept characteristics
Synthetic synthetic functional foods. (b) Consumers (motivation). Intention
Rezai et al. [101] 2014 Survey Asia 2004
functional foods who perceived the benefits of functional (b) Psychological to purchase
foods tended to accept synthetic characteristics
functional foods. (perceptions)
Cereal-based (a) The effect of consumers’ perceptions
products or about the health benefits of health
(a) Product
non-cereal products information on their likelihood to buy
Saba et al. [35] 2010 Conjoint study Europe 2392 characteristics Likelihood to buy
containing beneficial functional foods differed across different
compounds European countries (i.e., Finland,
from grains Germany, Italy, and the UK).
(a) Health awareness had a positive effect (a) Psychological
on consumers’ acceptance of vitamin characteristics (health
Sandmann Vitamin Consumer
2015 Mixed methods Europe 1051 D-fortified food. (b) Consumers trusted consciousness).
et al. [91] D-fortified food acceptance
professional health care organization as (b) Psychological
credible source of information. characteristics (trust)
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
characteristics
(a) Consumers’ educational level,
(educational level,
socio-economic status, and the presence
socio-economic status,
Schnettler Functional of children influenced their functional Willingness
2015 Survey South America 400 and presence
et al. [78] food concept food acceptance. (b) Consumers’ to purchase
of children).
knowledge affected their functional
(b) Psychological
foods acceptance.
characteristics
(knowledge)
(a) Consumers were uncertain and
Enriched (a) Psychological
Shan et al. [111] 2017 Survey Europe 486 negative about the health benefits of Purchase intention
processed meat characteristics (trust)
enriched processed meat products.
(a) Older consumers were the primary
consumers of functional foods. (a) Socio-demographic
(b) Consumers were more inclined to characteristics (age).
purchase functional foods with (b) Product
Functional
Siegrist et al. [75] 2008 Survey Europe 248 physiological health claims compared to characteristics (health Willingness to buy
food concept
psychological health claims. information).
(c) Consumers who trusted the food (c) Psychological
industry tended to accept characteristics (trust)
functional foods.
(a) Chinese consumers showed a higher
purchase intention toward functional (a) Socio-demographic
foods than Germans. (b) Consumers who characteristics
were more trusting of the food industry (nationality).
were willing to buy functional foods. (b) Psychological
Four functional
(c) Food neophobia had a negative effect characteristics (trust).
foods carriers with
Siegrist et al. [27] 2015 Survey Europe 945 on consumers’ willingness to buy (c) Psychological Willingness to buy
functional health
functional foods among Chinese characteristics (food
benefits statements
consumers, whereas it did not influence neophobia).
German consumers. (d) Health benefits (d) Product
claims on functional food products characteristics
increased Chinese consumers’ willingness (health information)
to buy them.
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
(a) Consumers’ level of knowledge
(information) affected their frequency of (a) Psychological
functional food consumption. characteristics
(b) Consumers’ household standard (knowledge).
(accompanied by children) affected their (b) Socio-demographic
frequency of functional food characteristics
consumption; consumers who had a (household standard,
Stojanovic Four Functional
2013 Survey Europe 479 higher educational level and higher education, and
et al. [62] product categories food consumption
income tended to buy functional foods. income).
(c) The perception of functional foods’ (c) Psychological
goodness (good/bad) influenced their characteristics
frequency of functional food (perceptions).
consumption. (d) A higher perceived (d) Product
price decreased consumers’ (good/bad) characteristics (price)
influenced their frequency.
Functional food
enriched with (a) Lifestyle and health behavior (a) Behavioral
Functional
Szakály et al. [121] 2012 Survey vitamins, minerals, Europe 1000 influenced consumers’ preferences for characteristics
food preferences
low sugar, low fact, functional food products. (lifestyle)
and higher fiber
(a) Consumers with higher educational
levels and higher incomes were more (a) Socio-demographic
willing to purchase functional foods. characteristics
Probiotic (functional) (b) Consumers who had more positive (education, income).
Szakály et al. [18] 2019 Survey Europe 500 Willingness to pay
yoghurt attitudes toward functional foods (i.e., (b) Psychological
believing functional foods’ health characteristics
benefits) were more willing to pay a (attitude)
premium for functional foods.
(a) Consumers were unwilling to
(a) Product
compromise on the taste of functional
characteristics (taste).
28 functional food foods for health benefits. (b) The
(b) Product
Temesi et al. [28] 2019 Survey carrier/ingredient Europe 1016 perceived correspondence of health Intention to buy
characteristics
combinations effects and carriers-ingredients
(carrier/ingredient
combinations positively influenced
combination)
consumers’ functional food acceptance.
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
(a) Consumers’ attitudes toward the
Eight different types perceived reward from using functional (a) Psychological
Urala &
2004 Survey of functional Europe 1158 foods and their confidence in functional characteristics Willingness to use
Lähteenmäki [7]
foods concepts foods were major determinants of their (attitude)
willingness to use functional foods.
(a) Consumers preferred margarine and
(a) Product
yoghurt products as attractive carriers
10 different health characteristics
compared to chewing gum, ice cream,
claims systematically (carrier/ingredient
Reanalyzed and chocolate. (b) Consumers preferred
Van Kleef et al. [57] 2005 combined with Europe 50 combination). Intention to try
existing data functional foods that communicate the
10 different (b) Product
health benefits of reducing the risk of
food carriers characteristics (health
physiologically based illnesses more than
information)
psychologically based illnesses.
(a) Consumers were more willing to pay
for Omega-3-enriched mozzarella if they (a) Psychological
believed in the health benefits of characteristics (beliefs). Expectations of
Experimental Omega-3-enriched
Vecchio et al. [98] 2016 Europe 150 preventing cardiovascular and rheumatic (b) Psychological functional food
auction mozzarella cheese
diseases. (b) Consumers’ self-efficacy was characteristics consumption
an important motivator for their (motivation)
functional food consumption.
(a) Consumers preferred functional foods
(a) Product
to have a healthier image and a natural
characteristics
combination of ingredients.
(carrier/ingredient
Calcium-enriched (b) Consumers may prefer functional
combination).
fruit juice; foods with health and nutrition claim
Experimental (b) Product
Verbeke et al. [58] 2009 Omega-3-enriched Europe 341 compared to a reduction of disease risk Purchase intention
study characteristics (health
spread; claim. (c) Consumers’ purchase intentions
information).
fiber-enriched cereals were negatively influenced by the
(c) Socio-demographic
presence of children under the age of 12
characteristics
and positively influenced by the presence
(household standard)
of teenagers.
(a) The presence of an ill family member (a) Psychological
may increase consumers’ functional food characteristics (health
consumption. (b) Consumers who consciousness).
Functional believed the health benefits of functional (b) Psychological Consumer
Verbeke [79] 2005 Survey Europe 215
food concept foods were more likely to accept characteristics (beliefs). acceptance
functional foods. (c) Consumers with a (c) Psychological
higher level of knowledge were less likely characteristics
to accept functional foods. (knowledge)
Table A1. Cont.
Categories
(Determinants)
(a) Older consumers and female
consumers were more likely to consume (a) Socio-demographic
functional foods. (b) Consumers with less characteristics (age,
knowledge about functional foods were gender).
more likely to buy functional foods after (b) Psychological
they received functional foods’ health characteristics
benefits information. (c) Food neophobia (knowledge).
Canned tomatoes
Experimental had a direct negative effect on consumers’ (c) Psychological
Verneau et al. [32] 2019 enriched Europe 100 Willingness to pay
auction attitudes toward adopting functional characteristics (food
with lycopene
foods. (d) Consumers who trusted science neophobia).
were more willing to pay for functional (d) Psychological
foods. (e) There was a positive correlation characteristics (trust).
between information about the benefit of (e) Product
lycopene and consumers’ willingness to characteristics
pay for lycopene-enriched (health information)
functional foods.
(a) Consumers with a high school or
characteristics
university degree were less accepting of
Wortmann Selenium- (educational level). Consumer
2018 Survey Europe 356 functional foods. (b) Perceived health
et al. [29] biofortified apples (b) Psychological acceptance
effects increased consumers’ acceptance
characteristics
of functional foods.
(perceptions)
(a) Psychological
characteristics
(a) Consumers’ positive attitude toward (attitude).
functional foods positively influenced (b) Psychological
their purchase intention. (b) Consumers’ characteristics
perceived behavioral control positively (perceived behavioral
Imported Korean
Xin & Seo [103] 2019 Survey Asia 361 influenced their purchase intentions. control). Purchase intention
functional foods
(c) Consumers’ subjective knowledge and (c) Psychological
health consciousness positively characteristics
influenced their intention to purchase (knowledge).
functional foods. (d) Psychological
characteristics
(health consciousness)
References
1. Department of Health and Human Services. Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2015–2020. Available online: https://health.gov/
our-work/nutrition-physical-activity/dietary-guidelines/previous-dietary-guidelines/2015 (accessed on 17 December 2021).
2. Reinhardt, U.E. Does the aging of the population really drive the demand for health care? Health Aff. 2003, 22, 27–39. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
3. Bagchi, D. Nutraceutical and Functional Food Regulations in the United States and around the World, 3rd ed.; Academic Press:
London, UK, 2019.
4. Bigliardi, B.; Galati, F. Innovation trends in the food industry: The case of functional foods. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2013,
31, 118–129. [CrossRef]
5. Hasler, C.M. Functional foods: Benefits, concerns and challenges—A position paper from the American Council on Science and
Health. J. Nutr. 2002, 132, 3772–3781. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6. Mark-Herbert, C. Innovation of a new product category—Functional foods. Technovation 2004, 24, 713–719. [CrossRef]
7. Urala, N.; Lähteenmäki, L. Attitudes behind consumers’ willingness to use functional foods. Food Qual. Prefer. 2004, 15, 793–803.
[CrossRef]
8. Alzamora, S.M.; Salvatori, D.; Tapia, M.S.; López-Malo, A.; Welti-Chanes, J.; Fito, P. Novel functional foods from vegetable
matrices impregnated with biologically active compounds. J. Food. Eng. 2005, 67, 205–214. [CrossRef]
9. Roberfroid, M.B. Global view on functional foods: European perspectives. Br. J. Nutr. 2002, 88, S133–S138. [CrossRef]
10. Siro, I.; Kápolna, E.; Kápolna, B.; Lugasi, A. Functional food. Product development, marketing and consumer acceptance-A
review. Appetite 2008, 51, 456–467. [CrossRef]
11. Diplock, A.T.; Aggett, P.J.; Ashwell, M.; Bornet, F.; Fern, E.B.; Roberfroid, M.B. Scientific concepts in functional foods in Europe:
Consensus document. Br. J. Nutr. 1999, 81, 1–27. [CrossRef]
12. Earl, R.; Thomas, P.R. (Eds.) Opportunities in the Nutrition and Food Sciences: Research Challenges and The Next Generation of
Investigators; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1994.
13. MacAulay, J.; Petersen, B.; Shank, F. Functional Foods: Opportunities and Challenges. Institute of Food Technologists (IFT) Expert
Report. Institute of Food Technologists. Available online: https://www.foodprocessing.com/assets/Media/MediaManager/
IFTFunctionalFoodsReport.pdf (accessed on 17 December 2021).
14. Martirosyan, D.M.; Singh, J. A new definition of functional food by FFC: What makes a new definition unique? Funct. Foods
Health Dis. 2015, 5, 209–223. [CrossRef]
15. Block, L.G.; Grier, S.A.; Childers, T.L.; Davis, B.; Ebert, J.E.; Kumanyika, S. From nutrients to nurturance: A conceptual introduction
to food well-being. J. Public Policy Mark. 2011, 30, 5–13. [CrossRef]
16. Dolgopolova, I.; Teuber, R.; Bruschi, V. Consumers’ perceptions of functional foods: Trust and food-neophobia in a cross-cultural
context. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2015, 39, 708–715. [CrossRef]
17. Frewer, L.; Scholderer, J.; Lambert, N. Consumer acceptance of functional foods: Issues for the future. Br. Food J. 2003, 105, 714–731.
[CrossRef]
18. Szakály, Z.; Kovács, S.; Pető, K.; Huszka, P.; Kiss, M. A modified model of the willingness to pay for functional foods. Appetite
2019, 138, 94–101. [CrossRef]
19. Mogendi, J.B.; De Steur, H.; Gellynck, X.; Makokha, A. Consumer evaluation of food with nutritional benefits: A systematic
review and narrative synthesis. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 2016, 67, 355–371. [CrossRef]
20. Plasek, B.; Temesi, Á. The credibility of the effects of functional food products and consumers’ willingness to purchase/willingness
to pay–review. Appetite 2019, 143, 104398. [CrossRef]
21. Bimbo, F.; Bonanno, A.; Nocella, G.; Viscecchia, R.; Nardone, G.; De Devitiis, B.; Carlucci, D. Consumers’ acceptance and
preferences for nutrition-modified and functional dairy products: A systematic review. Appetite 2017, 113, 141–154. [CrossRef]
22. Kushwah, S.; Dhir, A.; Sagar, M.; Gupta, B. Determinants of organic food consumption. A systematic literature review on motives
and barriers. Appetite 2019, 143, 104402. [CrossRef]
23. Munn, Z.; Peters, M.D.; Stern, C.; Tufanaru, C.; McArthur, A.; Aromataris, E. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for
authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2018, 18, 1–7. [CrossRef]
24. Arksey, H.; O’Malley, L. Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 2005, 8, 19–32.
[CrossRef]
25. Brečić, R.; Gorton, M.; Barjolle, D. Understanding variations in the consumption of functional foods–evidence from Croatia.
Br. Food J. 2014, 116, 662–675. [CrossRef]
26. Kraus, A.; Annunziata, A.; Vecchio, R. Sociodemographic factors differentiating the consumer and the motivations for functional
food consumption. J. Am. Coll. Nutr. 2017, 36, 116–126. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
27. Siegrist, M.; Shi, J.; Giusto, A.; Hartmann, C. Worlds apart. Consumer acceptance of functional foods and beverages in Germany
and China. Appetite 2015, 92, 87–93. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
28. Temesi, Á.; Bacsó, Á.; Grunert, K.G.; Lakner, Z. Perceived correspondence of health effects as a new determinant influencing
purchase intention for functional food. Nutrients 2019, 11, 740. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
29. Wortmann, L.; Enneking, U.; Daum, D. German consumers’ attitude towards selenium-biofortified apples and acceptance of
related nutrition and health claims. Nutrients 2018, 10, 190. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
30. Bruschi, V.; Teuber, R.; Dolgopolova, I. Acceptance and willingness to pay for health-enhancing bakery products–Empirical
evidence for young urban Russian consumers. Food Qual. Prefer. 2015, 46, 79–91. [CrossRef]
31. Pappalardo, G.; Lusk, J.L. The role of beliefs in purchasing process of functional foods. Food Qual. Prefer. 2016, 53, 151–158.
[CrossRef]
32. Verneau, F.; La Barbera, F.; Furno, M. The role of health information in consumers’ willingness to pay for canned crushed tomatoes
enriched with Lycopene. Nutrients 2019, 11, 2173. [CrossRef]
33. Ares, G.; Gimenez, A.; Gambaro, A. Consumer perceived healthiness and willingness to try functional milk desserts. Influence of
ingredient, ingredient name and health claim. Food Qual. Prefer. 2009, 20, 50–56. [CrossRef]
34. Bech-Larsen, T.; Grunert, K.G. The perceived healthiness of functional foods: A conjoint study of Danish, Finnish and American
consumers’ perception of functional foods. Appetite 2003, 40, 9–14. [CrossRef]
35. Saba, A.; Vassallo, M.; Shepherd, R.; Lampila, P.; Arvola, A.; Dean, M.; Winkelmann, M.; Claupein, E.; Lähteenmäki, L. Country-
wise differences in perception of health-related messages in cereal-based food products. Food Qual. Prefer. 2010, 21, 385–393.
[CrossRef]
36. Barreiro-Hurlé, J.; Colombo, S.; Cantos-Villar, E. Is there a market for functional wines? Consumer preferences and willingness to
pay for resveratrol-enriched red wine. Food Qual. Prefer. 2008, 19, 360–371. [CrossRef]
37. Bechtold, K.B.; Abdulai, A. Combining attitudinal statements with choice experiments to analyze preference heterogeneity for
functional dairy products. Food Policy 2014, 47, 97–106. [CrossRef]
38. Bui, D.T. Consumer acceptance of functional foods in ho chi Minh City. Eurasian J. Bus. Econ. 2015, 8, 19–34. [CrossRef]
39. Jezewska-Zychowicz, M. Impact of beliefs and attitudes on young consumers’ willingness to use functional food. Polish J. Food
Nutr. Sci. 2009, 59, 183–187.
40. Markovina, J.; Cacic, J.; Kljusuric, J.G.; Kovacic, D. Young consumers’ perception of functional foods in Croatia. Br. Food J. 2011,
113, 7–16. [CrossRef]
41. Dean, M.; Lampila, P.; Shepherd, R.; Arvola, A.; Saba, A.; Vassallo, M.; Claupein, E.; Winkelmann, M.; Lähteenmäki, L. Perceived
relevance and foods with health-related claims. Food Qual. Prefer. 2012, 24, 129–135. [CrossRef]
42. Devcich, D.A.; Pedersen, I.K.; Petrie, K.J. You eat what you are: Modern health worries and the acceptance of natural and
synthetic additives in functional foods. Appetite 2007, 48, 333–337. [CrossRef]
43. Ozen, A.E.; del Mar Bibiloni, M.; Pons, A.; Tur, J.A. Sociodemographic and lifestyle determinants of functional food consumption
in an adult population of the Balearic Islands. Ann. Nutr. Metab. 2013, 63, 200–207. [CrossRef]
44. Chang, H.P.; Ma, C.C.; Chen, H.S. The impacts of young consumers’ health values on functional beverages purchase intentions.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 3479. [CrossRef]
45. Huang, L.; Bai, L.; Zhang, X.; Gong, S. Re-understanding the antecedents of functional foods purchase: Mediating effect of
purchase attitude and moderating effect of food neophobia. Food Qual. Prefer. 2019, 73, 266–275. [CrossRef]
46. Jahn, S.; Tsalis, G.; Lähteenmäki, L. How attitude towards food fortification can lead to purchase intention. Appetite 2019,
133, 370–377. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
47. Jung, S.E.; Shin, Y.H.; Severt, K.; Crowe-White, K.M. Determinants of a consumer’s intention to consume antioxidant-infused
sugar-free chewing gum: Measuring taste, attitude, and health consciousness. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2020, 26, 38–54. [CrossRef]
48. Ares, G.; Giménez, A.; Deliza, R. Influence of three non-sensory factors on consumer choice of functional yogurts over regular
ones. Food Qual. Prefer. 2010, 21, 361–367. [CrossRef]
49. Kljusuric, J.G.; Čačić, J.; Misir, A.; Čačić, D. Geographical region as a factor influencing consumers’ perception of functional
food–case of Croatia. Br. Food J. 2015, 117, 1017–1031. [CrossRef]
50. Narayana, N.M.N.K.; Fernando, S.; Samaraweera, G.C. Awareness and attitude towards functional dairy products among
consumers in western province of Sri Lanka. Turk. J. Agric. Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 8, 1308–1314. [CrossRef]
51. Hardy, G. Nutraceuticals and functional foods: Introduction and meaning. Nutrition 2000, 16, 688–689. [CrossRef]
52. Granato, D.; Barba, F.J.; Bursać Kovačević, D.; Lorenzo, J.M.; Cruz, A.G.; Putnik, P. Functional foods: Product development,
technological trends, efficacy testing, and safety. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 11, 93–118. [CrossRef]
53. Ares, G.; Gámbaro, A. Influence of gender, age and motives underlying food choice on perceived healthiness and willingness to
try functional foods. Appetite 2007, 49, 148–158. [CrossRef]
54. Huang, L.; Bai, L.; Gong, S. The effects of carrier, benefit, and perceived trust in information channel on functional food purchase
intention among Chinese consumers. Food Qual. Prefer. 2020, 81, 103854. [CrossRef]
55. Krutulyte, R.; Grunert, K.G.; Scholderer, J.; Lähteenmäki, L.; Hagemann, K.S.; Elgaard, P.; Nielsen, B.; Graverholt, J.P. Perceived
fit of different combinations of carriers and functional ingredients and its effect on purchase intention. Food Qual. Prefer. 2011,
22, 11–16. [CrossRef]
56. Lu, J. The effect of perceived carrier-ingredient fit on purchase intention of functional food moderated by nutrition knowledge
and health claim. Br. Food J. 2015, 117, 1872–1885. [CrossRef]
57. Van Kleef, E.; van Trijp, H.C.; Luning, P. Functional foods: Health claim-food product compatibility and the impact of health
claim framing on consumer evaluation. Appetite 2005, 44, 299–308. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
58. Verbeke, W.; Scholderer, J.; Lähteenmäki, L. Consumer appeal of nutrition and health claims in three existing product concepts.
Appetite 2009, 52, 684–692. [CrossRef]
59. Bech-Larsen, T.; Scholderer, J. Functional foods in Europe: Consumer research, market experiences and regulatory aspects.
Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2007, 18, 231–234. [CrossRef]
60. Büyükkaragöz, A.; Bas, M.; Sağlam, D.; Cengiz, Ş.E. Consumers’ awareness, acceptance and attitudes towards functional foods in
Turkey. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2014, 38, 628–635. [CrossRef]
61. Mirosa, M.; Mangan-Walker, E. Young Chinese and functional foods for mobility health: Perceptions of importance, trust, and
willingness to purchase and pay a premium. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2018, 24, 216–234. [CrossRef]
62. Stojanovic, Z.; Filipovic, J.; Mugosa, B. Consumer acceptance of functional foods in Montenegro. Montenegrin J. Econ. 2013,
9, 65–74.
63. Jaeger, S.R. Non-sensory factors in sensory science research. Food Qual. Prefer. 2006, 17, 132–144. [CrossRef]
64. Menrad, K. Market and marketing of functional food in Europe. J. Food Eng. 2003, 56, 181–188. [CrossRef]
65. Moons, I.; Barbarossa, C.; De Pelsmacker, P. The determinants of the adoption intention of eco-friendly functional food in different
market segments. Ecol. Econ. 2018, 151, 151–161. [CrossRef]
66. Lyly, M.; Roininen, K.; Honkapää, K.; Poutanen, K.; Lähteenmäki, L. Factors influencing consumers’ willingness to use beverages
and ready-to-eat frozen soups containing oat β-glucan in Finland, France and Sweden. Food Qual. Prefer. 2007, 18, 242–255.
[CrossRef]
67. Verbeke, W. Functional foods: Consumer willingness to compromise on taste for health? Food Qual. Prefer. 2006, 17, 126–131.
[CrossRef]
68. Bimbo, F.; Bonanno, A.; Van Trijp, H.; Viscecchia, R. Body image dissatisfaction and health-enhancing food choices: A pilot study
from a sample of Italian yogurt consumers. Br. Food J. 2018, 120, 2778–2792. [CrossRef]
69. Kozup, J.C.; Creyer, E.H.; Burton, S. Making healthful food choices: The influence of health claims and nutrition information on
consumers’ evaluations of packaged food products and restaurant menu items. J. Mark. 2003, 67, 19–34. [CrossRef]
70. Marette, S.; Roosen, J.; Blanchemanche, S.; Feinblatt-Mélèze, E. Functional food, uncertainty and consumers’ choices: A lab
experiment with enriched yoghurts for lowering cholesterol. Food Policy 2010, 35, 419–428. [CrossRef]
71. González-Díaz, C.; Vilaplana-Aparicio, M.J.; Iglesias-García, M. How is functional food advertising understood? An approxima-
tion in university students. Nutrients 2020, 12, 3312. [CrossRef]
72. Ahn, B.I.; Bae, M.S.; Nayga Jr, R.M. Information effects on consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for a functional food
product: The case of red ginseng concentrate. Asian Econ. J. 2016, 30, 197–219. [CrossRef]
73. Markosyan, A.; McCluskey, J.J.; Wahl, T.I. Consumer response to information about a functional food product: Apples enriched
with antioxidants. Can. J. Agric. Econ. 2009, 57, 325–341. [CrossRef]
74. Steinhauser, J.; Hamm, U. Consumer and product-specific characteristics influencing the effect of nutrition, health and risk
reduction claims on preferences and purchase behavior–A systematic review. Appetite 2018, 127, 303–323. [CrossRef]
75. Siegrist, M.; Stampfli, N.; Kastenholz, H. Consumers’ willingness to buy functional foods. The influence of carrier, benefit and
trust. Appetite 2008, 51, 526–529. [CrossRef]
76. Kavoosi-Kalashami, M.; Pourfarzad, A.; Ghaibi, S.; Allahyari, M.S.; Surujlal, J.; Borsellino, V. Urban consumers’ attitudes and
willingness to pay for functional foods in Iran: A case of dietary sugar. AIMS Agric. Food 2017, 2, 310–323. [CrossRef]
77. Moro, D.; Veneziani, M.; Sckokai, P.; Castellari, E. Consumer willingness to pay for catechin-enriched yogurt: Evidence from a
stated choice experiment. Agribusiness 2015, 31, 243–258. [CrossRef]
78. Schnettler, B.; Miranda, H.; Lobos, G.; Sepúlveda, J.; Orellana, L.; Mora, M.; Grunert, K. Willingness to purchase functional foods
according to their benefits. Br. Food J. 2015, 117, 1453–1473. [CrossRef]
79. Verbeke, W. Consumer acceptance of functional foods: Socio-demographic, cognitive and attitudinal determinants. Food Qual.
Prefer. 2005, 16, 45–57. [CrossRef]
80. De Jong, N.; Ocke, M.C.; Branderhorst, H.A.; Friele, R. Demographic and lifestyle characteristics of functional food consumers
and dietary supplement users. Br. J. Nutr. 2003, 89, 273–281. [CrossRef]
81. Çakiroğlu, F.P.; Uçar, A. Consumer attitudes towards purchasing functional products. Prog. Nutr. 2018, 20, 257–262. [CrossRef]
82. Rezai, G.; Teng, P.K.; Mohamed, Z.; Shamsudin, M.N. Functional food knowledge and perceptions among young consumers in
Malaysia. Int. J. Econ. Manag. 2012, 6, 307–312. [CrossRef]
83. Carrillo, E.; Prado-Gascó, V.; Fiszman, S.; Varela, P. Why buying functional foods? Understanding spending behavior through
structural equation modelling. Food Res. Int. 2013, 50, 361–368. [CrossRef]
84. Cranfield, J.; Henson, S.; Masakure, O. Factors affecting the extent to which consumers incorporate functional ingredients into
their diets. J Agric Econ. 2011, 62, 375–392. [CrossRef]
85. Bekoglu, F.B.; Ergen, A.; Inci, B. The impact of attitude, consumer innovativeness and interpersonal influence on functional food
consumption. J. Int. Bus. 2016, 9, 79–87. [CrossRef]
86. Landström, E.; Hursti, U.K.K.; Becker, W.; Magnusson, M. Use of functional foods among Swedish consumers is related to
health-consciousness and perceived effect. Br. J. Nutr. 2007, 98, 1058–1069. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
87. Corso, M.P.; Kalschne, D.L.; Benassi, M.D.T. Consumer’s attitude regarding soluble coffee enriched with antioxidants. Beverages
2018, 4, 72. [CrossRef]
88. Peng, Y.; West, G.E.; Wang, C. Consumer attitudes and acceptance of CLA-enriched dairy products. Can. J. Agric. Econ. 2006,
54, 663–684. [CrossRef]
89. Labrecque, J.; Doyon, M.; Bellavance, F.; Kolodinsky, J. Acceptance of functional foods: A comparison of French, American, and
French Canadian consumers. Can. J. Agric. Econ. 2006, 54, 647–661. [CrossRef]
90. Mai, R.; Hoffmann, S. How to combat the unhealthy= tasty intuition: The influencing role of health consciousness. J. Public Policy
Mark. 2015, 34, 63–83. [CrossRef]
91. Sandmann, A.; Brown, J.; Mau, G.; Saur, M.; Amling, M.; Barvencik, F. Acceptance of vitamin D-fortified products in Germany—A
representative consumer survey. Food Qual. Prefer. 2015, 43, 53–62. [CrossRef]
92. Chen, M.F. The joint moderating effect of health consciousness and healthy lifestyle on consumers’ willingness to use functional
foods in Taiwan. Appetite 2011, 57, 253–262. [CrossRef]
93. Cox, D.N.; Bastiaans, K. Understanding Australian consumers’ perceptions of selenium and motivations to consume selenium
enriched foods. Food Qual. Prefer. 2007, 18, 66–76. [CrossRef]
94. Moorman, C.; Matulich, E. A model of consumers’ preventive health behaviors: The role of health motivation and health ability.
J. Consum. Res. 1993, 20, 208–228. [CrossRef]
95. Kraus, A. Factors influencing the decisions to buy and consume functional food. Br. Food J. 2015, 117, 1622–1636. [CrossRef]
96. Jeżewska-Zychowicz, M.; Królak, M. Do Consumers’ attitudes towards food technologies and motives of food choice influence
willingness to eat cereal products fortified with fiber? Pol. J. Food. Nutr. Sci. 2015, 65, 281–292. [CrossRef]
97. Nystrand, B.T.; Olsen, S.O. Consumers’ attitudes and intentions toward consuming functional foods in Norway. Food Qual. Prefer.
2020, 80, 103827. [CrossRef]
98. Vecchio, R.; Lombardi, A.; Cembalo, L.; Caracciolo, F.; Cicia, G.; Masucci, F.; Di Francia, A. Consumers’ willingness to pay and
drivers of motivation to consume omega-3 enriched mozzarella cheese. Br. Food J. 2016, 118, 2404–2419. [CrossRef]
99. Barauskaite, D.; Gineikiene, J.; Fennis, B.M.; Auruskeviciene, V.; Yamaguchi, M.; Kondo, N. Eating healthy to impress: How
conspicuous consumption, perceived self-control motivation, and descriptive normative influence determine functional food
choices. Appetite 2018, 131, 59–67. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
100. Nguyen, N.; Nguyen, H.V.; Nguyen, P.T.; Tran, V.T.; Nguyen, H.N.; Nguyen, T.M.N.; Cao, K.T.; Nguyen, T.H. Some key factors
affecting consumers’ intentions to purchase functional foods: A case study of functional yogurts in Vietnam. Foods 2020, 9, 24.
[CrossRef]
101. Rezai, G.; Kit Teng, P.; Mohamed, Z.; Shamsudin, M.N. Structural equation modeling of consumer purchase intention toward
synthetic functional foods. J. Food Prod. Mark. 2014, 20, 13–34. [CrossRef]
102. Phuong, N.N.D.; Dat, N.T. The effect of country-of-origin on customer purchase intention: A study of functional products in
Vietnam. J. Asian Financ. Econ. Bus. 2017, 4, 75–83. [CrossRef]
103. Xin, L.; Seo, S.S. The role of consumer ethnocentrism, country image, and subjective knowledge in predicting intention to
purchase imported functional foods. Br. Food J. 2019, 122, 448–464. [CrossRef]
104. Ajzen, I.; Madden, T.J. Prediction of goal-directed behavior: Attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. J. Exp. Soc.
Psychol. 1986, 22, 453–474. [CrossRef]
105. Patch, C.S.; Tapsell, L.C.; Williams, P.G. Attitudes and intentions toward purchasing novel foods enriched with omega-3 fatty
acids. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2005, 37, 235–241. [CrossRef]
106. Chen, M.F. The mediating role of subjective health complaints on willingness to use selected functional foods. Food Qual. Prefer.
2011, 22, 110–118. [CrossRef]
107. Crites Jr, S.L.; Fabrigar, L.R.; Petty, R.E. Measuring the affective and cognitive properties of attitudes: Conceptual and method-
ological issues. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 1994, 20, 619–634. [CrossRef]
108. Voss, K.E.; Spangenberg, E.R.; Grohmann, B. Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. J. Mark. Res.
2003, 40, 310–320. [CrossRef]
109. Lusk, J.L.; Briggeman, B.C. Food values. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 2009, 91, 184–196. [CrossRef]
110. Loizou, E.; Michailidis, A.; Chatzitheodoridis, F. Investigating the drivers that influence the adoption of differentiated food
products. Br. Food J. 2013, 115, 917–935. [CrossRef]
111. Shan, L.C.; Henchion, M.; De Brún, A.; Murrin, C.; Wall, P.G.; Monahan, F.J. Factors that predict consumer acceptance of enriched
processed meats. Meat Sci. 2017, 133, 185–193. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
112. Melbye, E.L.; Hansen, H.; Onozaka, Y. Advertising functional foods: The effects of physical body size and appeal type on ad
credibility and purchase intentions. J. Int. Food Agribus. Mark. 2015, 27, 142–154. [CrossRef]
113. Barrena, R.; Sánchez, M. Neophobia, personal consumer values and novel food acceptance. Food Qual. Prefer. 2013, 27, 72–84.
[CrossRef]
114. Pliner, P.; Hobden, K. Development of a scale to measure the trait of food neophobia in humans. Appetite 1992, 19, 105–120.
[CrossRef]
115. Schickenberg, B.; Van Assema, P.; Brug, J.; De Vries, N.K. Are the Dutch acquainted with and willing to try healthful food
products? The role of food neophobia. Public Health Nutr. 2008, 11, 493–500. [CrossRef]
116. La Barbera, F.; Amato, M.; Sannino, G. Understanding consumers’ intention and behavior towards functionalized food. Br. Food J.
2016, 118, 885–895. [CrossRef]
117. Axelson, M.L.; Brinberg, D. The measurement and conceptualization of nutrition knowledge. J. Nutr. Educ. 1992, 24, 239–246.
[CrossRef]
118. Bhaskaran, S.; Hardley, F. Buyer beliefs, attitudes and behavior: Foods with therapeutic claims. J. Consum. Mark. 2002, 19, 591–606.
[CrossRef]
119. Topolska, K.; Florkiewicz, A.; Filipiak-Florkiewicz, A. Functional Food—Consumer Motivations and Expectations. Int. J. Environ.
Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 5327. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
120. Newsom, J.T.; McFarland, B.H.; Kaplan, M.S.; Huguet, N.; Zani, B. The health consciousness myth: Implications of the near
independence of major health behaviors in the North American population. Soc. Sci. Med. 2005, 60, 433–437. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
121. Szakály, Z.; Szente, V.; Kövér, G.; Polereczki, Z.; Szigeti, O. The influence of lifestyle on health behavior and preference for
functional foods. Appetite 2012, 58, 406–413. [CrossRef]
122. Christidis, N.; Tsoulfa, G.; Varagunam, M.; Babatzimopoulou, M. A cross sectional study of consumer awareness of functional
foods in Thessaloniki, Greece. Nutr. Food Sci. 2011, 41, 165–174. [CrossRef]
123. Grunert, K.G.; Scholderer, J.; Rogeaux, M. Determinants of consumer understanding of health claims. Appetite 2011, 56, 269–277.
[CrossRef]

Ijerph 19 01217

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ijerph 19 01217

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ijerph 19 01217

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of

Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communications, Texas A&M University,

Academic Editor: Paul B.

Received: 21 December 2021 1. Introduction

Commission’s Concerted Action on Functional Food Science, coordinated by the Interna-

2.1. Research Objectives

2.2. Databases and Search Strategy

2.3. Study Management and Screening

2.4. Data Extraction and Determinants’ Synthesis

Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria for article screening.

Figure 1. Literature review search and screening process.

Figure 2. Year of publication of the 75 articles included in the scoping review.

3.1. Product Characteristics

3.1.1. The Combination of Carriers and Ingredients

Health information (n = 10)

Nationality and geographic location (n = 3)

Trust (n = 10) and food neophobia (n = 5)

Health related behavior (n = 4)

Presence of diet-related problem (n = 1)

Subjective health complaints (n = 1)

Body mass index (n = 2)

Poor subjective health (n = 2)

3.1.5. Health Information

3.2. Socio-Demographic Characteristics

3.2.3. Educational Level

3.2.4. Household Characteristics

3.2.5. Nationality and Geographic Location

3.2.6. Marital Status

3.3. Psychological Characteristics

3.3.1. Health Consciousness

3.3.6. Trust and Food Neophobia

3.3.7. Nutrition Knowledge

tion positively affected consumers’ frequency of consuming functional foods. Similarly, La

3.4. Behavioral Characteristics

3.5. Physical Characteristics

fessionals [91], scientists [61], or healthy-looking individuals who appear to be exercise

Limitations and Future Recommendations

Table A1. Characteristics and key findings of included studies.

Table A1. Cont.

Table A1. Cont.

Table A1. Cont.

Table A1. Cont.

Table A1. Cont.

Table A1. Cont.

Table A1. Cont.

Table A1. Cont.

Table A1. Cont.

Table A1. Cont.

Table A1. Cont.

Table A1. Cont.

Table A1. Cont.

Table A1. Cont.

Table A1. Cont.

Table A1. Cont.

You might also like