有「罪」共享？消費者分享放縱食品的潛在因子：反應性罪惡感和營養知識

Potential Factors of Indulgent Food Sharing Behavior: Reactive Guilt and Nutrition Knowledge

邱泰銓(Tai-Chuan Chiu)

指導教授 ： 柯冠州

國立臺灣大學/管理學院/商學研究所/碩士(2020年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU202001506

摘要

本研究主要探討在放縱飲食情境中的個體，會因飲食罪惡感情緒而引發的非理性飲食行為，以及其背後可能的心理機制；並且探索能捕捉個體在放縱飲食過後，所感受到罪惡感的預測變項。
經由行銷和消費者行為領域中飲食決策與行為的文獻探討後，本研究發現過往文獻大都認為個體在長短期飲食計畫的目標衝突後，影響特定個體做出不理性飲食決策的主要中介變數，為個體評量飲食時的「預期性飲食罪惡感」；而激起個體該類型的罪惡感，主要來自於兩類型的外在刺激物：食品本身的性質（健康食品或者放縱食品）和食品包裝（如低脂標示已被證實能顯著降低過重族群個體所感受到的飲食罪惡感）。
然而，過往這樣的研究方法潛藏了一大假設：亦即個體所預期感受到不同程度的飲食性罪惡感，只會來自於兩類的外在刺激物。這忽略了個體本身特質亦會影響感受到飲食性罪惡感差異的可能性，例如，營養知識較為豐富的個體，會制定較嚴格的飲食標準，或以較多的營養面向去衡量當下的飲食行為，因此應會在放縱飲食過後感受到更高程度的飲食性罪惡感。
不同於先前飲食決策文獻所探討的「預期性飲食罪惡感」，本研究希望探討個體「放縱飲食後所實際感受到的飲食罪惡感」，在飲食情境中所扮演的角色。本研究經由與罪惡感相關的心理學領域文獻探討後，藉由Festinger所提出的認知失調理論和社會比較理論，預期放縱飲食過後的個體，會試圖以特定行為去降低自身所感受到的飲食罪惡感，或避免會使自己飲食罪惡感再度上升的舉動。
具體來說，本研究預期營養知識較高的個體，會在放縱飲食後感受到較高的飲食罪惡感；而個體在放縱飲食過後所感受到的飲食罪惡感，將會激勵個體購買健康食品（無糖豆漿）和抑制個體購買放縱食品（洋芋片）的意願；並且因個體能夠藉由「分享」同樣屬於放縱類型食品給別人，來降低自身因攝取放縱食品所引發的罪惡感，而更為有意願來從事放縱食品的分享行為。
本研究藉由一個前測和兩個實驗來驗證以上推測與預期，並證實了個體攝取放縱食品所感受到的飲食罪惡感和個體所具備的營養知識呈正相關；而這類型的罪惡感將會增加（減少）對健康（放縱）食品的購買意願；且在此罪惡感狀態下的個體，能藉由分享同樣放縱的零食，來顯著降低自身所感受到的飲食罪惡感，並受此激勵來從事分享行為。
本研究最重要的發現是營養知識較高的健康族群，反而也有可能會是傳染導致肥胖的飲食行為的來源之一。肥胖的飲食行為，已被證實有著社區行為傳播(social contagion)的可能；因此這對健康政策制定者是個警訊：這代表在日常生活放縱飲食時，會分享放縱食品和散播肥胖飲食行為的，反倒是那些意想不到的「高營養知識分子」，而非常理能預想得到的飲食習慣不佳之族群。
此外，本研究所提出的客觀營養知識量表，則能協助未來學界捕捉飲食情境中飲食罪惡感的變化，亦即可將營養知識作為控制變數，以延續過往以預期性飲食罪惡感作為中介變數的研究；藉此，能幫助研究者專注於探討食品包裝等外在刺激物，會經由影響飲食罪惡感所造成的認知偏誤效果。

關鍵字

放縱食物 ； 肥胖 ； 分享 ； 反應性罪惡感 ； 認知失調 ； 社會比較

並列摘要

This research aims to investigate the underlying mechanism of irrational dietary decision after individuals indulges themselves with indulgent foods, and to explore the possible predictor variables of dietary guilt after indulging.
This research found that most of the previous studies thought the key mediator of irrational dietary behaviors is “anticipatory guilt,” which would arise when the individuals are evaluating upcoming indulgent dietary decision and thus encounter goal conflict between long-term healthy goal and short-term indulgent goal. In these studies, the dietary “anticipatory guilt” could be concluded to generate from two external sources: the nature of the food (indulgent food or healthy food) and the food packages (for example, the “low fat” label on the food packages had been proved to lower the anticipatory guilt and therefore increase the consumption.)
However, such research method and design potentially propose a crucial hypothesis that individuals’ anticipatory guilt would be influenced solely by external stimuli and would be the same across different individuals, which ignores the possibility that the attributes from the individual might influence dietary guilt as well. For example, logically, individual with a wealth of nutrition knowledge would set higher standard on the diet or evaluate the dietary decision from more standards of nutrients. Therefore, individuals with higher level of nutrition knowledge is predicted to feel more guilt after indulging snacks.
While the focus of previous studies is “anticipatory guilt,” this research aims to explore the role of more common “reactive” guilt which would arise after a consumer indulges oneself with a snack.
Building on cognitive dissonance theory and social comparison theory proposed by Festinger, this research also expect that individuals would try to alleviate or inhibit their dietary guilt level by particular behaviors. Specifically, after indulging snacks, individuals with a wealth of nutrition knowledge are expected to feel higher level of guilt which would motivate them to purchase (avoid purchasing) healthy (indulgent) food, or share indulgent food. The guilt level of the individual would also be alleviated by simply sharing the same indulgent food with others.
In order to test the hypotheses mentioned above, one pilot study and two experiments are conducted in National Taiwan University.
For policy makers, it’s worthwhile to realize that the food sharing behaviors might not be rational, especially in those with a wealth of nutrition knowledge, and thus could be a source of “mutual obesity.” As a result, the policy makers should be aware of not only the current health issues faced by obese groups, but the concept that those “healthy role model” might unconsciously worsen the problem. As for the consumers, such findings give a sign to pay more attention to the behavior while they feel dietary guilt, which might be irrational and even harmful to others’ health. In the end, the fact that nutrition knowledge and dietary guilt are positively correlated, could help future research in the dietary behavior field to concisely capture individual guilt response and to focus on the main effect from the package stimuli.

並列關鍵字

indulgent food ； obesity ； sharing ； reactive guilt ； cognitive dissonance ； social comparison

參考文獻

1.Anderson, E. T., Simester, D. I. (2003). Effects of $9 price endings on retail sales: Evidence from field experiments. Quantitative marketing and Economics, 1(1), 93-110.

2.Aronoff, J., Woike, B. A., Hyman, L. M. (1992). Which are the stimuli in facial displays of anger and happiness? Configurational bases of emotion recognition. Journal of personality and social psychology, 62(6), 1050.

3.Basil, D. Z., Ridgway, N. M., Basil, M. D. (2006). Guilt appeals: The mediating effect of responsibility. Psychology Marketing, 23(12), 1035-1054.

4.Baumeister, R. F. (2002). Yielding to temptation: Self-control failure, impulsive purchasing, and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(4), 670-676.

5.Burnett, M. S., Lunsford, D. A. (1994). Conceptualizing guilt in the consumer decision‐making process. Journal of Consumer Marketing.