Mapping Micro Foodways

Mapping Micro-Foodways to Understand Preference: How do Enclosed Environments Attempt to Influence our Food Choices

ABSTRACT

The influences that make up who we are as human beings determine our preferences, consciously and unconsciously guiding our choices, with the result that often individuals have little understanding of why they choose what they consume. Over the course of a lifetime this can have important consequences for one’s health, the result being downstream morbidity and mortality in the life-path of the population. Due to the large number and variety of such influences it is difficult to narrow the field of determinate factors involved in food choice, and to understand why consumers make the choices they do. This study attempts to classify some of the influences that affect food choice within a micro-foodway (defined as an enclosed environment that restricts our food choices). It also involved mapping the environment and learning how factors both inside and outside the environment could possibly influence choice. In this paper I will reflect on the nature of my Bachelors of Individualized Study concentration, as well as how the disciplines involved in the degree relate to the study. I will explain the nature of the problem, present a review of current literature on the subject of food choice, describe the research question, and relate the methods I employed in the study. Finally I will present the analysis of my research as well as the limitations of this work and questions and suggestions for further study.

Mapping Micro-Foodways to Understand PreferenceEach individual makes specific choices about what they consume, based on our experiences in our formative years, as well as a number of complex influential factors, in a dynamic and evolving manner many times each day. Complex social interactions are conjoined with enculturated data created through episodic experiences. Peer influence, trend, nutritional need and neural chemistry, all play a role in our decision making process in regards to food, creating conscious and unconscious decisions which can have profound influences on the length and quality of our lives. Food choice over our lifetimes has important implications for our health, and we have little understanding of the factors that are influencing our choices.

I have studied three primary disciplines at George Mason and all worked well and in conjunction for the purpose of this study. The title of my BIS (Bachelors of Individualized Study) concentration is Intercultural Food Studies, and it primarily employs the disciplines of Anthropology and Sociology together with the study of Nutrition. The purpose of this concentration is to frame and engage larger questions about food, subsistence and culture, attempting to formulate solutions and strategies that can transform the food landscape as it now appears, as well as to be able to effectively communicate those concepts to a wide audience across a diverse media spectrum.

Food choice and nutrition are inextricably linked and the combination have important implications for our personal health and society at large. It is vital to have a strong working knowledge of the processes within the body related to nutrition to be able to understand the effects on our overall lifetime health of our preferences and choices. Cultural Anthropology teaches us to alter our perspective in ways that allows for the objective study of a subjects actions. Ethnography and Participant Observation allow the researcher to view in real time the subject’s mechanisms of choice and hear in their own voice why they believe they decided upon a particular food. And finally Sociology can provide broad theoretical support for the hypothesis and draw larger conclusions from the final data set to help formulate conclusions and formulate recommendations.

The Problem

While food is integral to our being, we have little knowledge of why we choose the foods we consume, and a limited understanding of comparative nutritional values between different foods, even though we may believe we do. Apparent motives such as “healthy” diets backed by little or inconsistent research, heredity, ethnicity, enculturation, access and availability only tell part of the story, we have to search deeper for the subliminal data that is contributing to our decision making process. Studies have determined a number of apparent distal and proximal influences on our cognitive mechanisms for choice. They can include factors such as taste, dietary needs, culture, (proximal) as well as heredity, genetics, and availability (distal) (Counihan & Kaplan, 2004; Hardcastle, Thøgersen-Ntoumani, & Chatzisarantis, 2015; Lyerly & Reeve, 2015). Food preference has historically been a determining factor in human development leading to plant and animal domestication, and in conjunction with feasting (perhaps the ultimate expression of food choice), catalyzed developments in food production, storage and distribution (Smith, 2006). Food choices we make impact our health and although nutritional deficiencies have traditionally been the greatest problem, developed countries have seen a shift to health problems related to excessive caloric intake (Rankinen & Bouchard, 2006). Focusing purely on caloric content alone however masks a larger problem of overall health, and a more holistic approach is needed if we are to be aware of more complex interactions. Obesity, heart disease and diabetes are growing health problems related to food choice. The overall rate of obesity in the United States has continued to increase despite a growing awareness of the problem and the health risks associated with the disease(Delaney Burke, 2011). This creates a societal problem with a greater amount of public resources going towards mitigating food related health problems, as well as psychological effects on the population related to body image and self-perception particularly for women (Delaney & McCarthy, 2011; Hardcastle et al., 2015). Despite awareness campaigns from governments and an increase in labeling that increases the information delivered to the consumer, health problems related to food intake continue to rise and the burden on society to provide health care increases. Food choice research aims to provide policy makers, producers and consumers with tools and recommendations that can mitigate these problems and reverse the growing trends. Consumers must also be made aware of current research and given greater access to information that can help them understand the complex interaction between the many push and pull factors that are affecting their choices and perceptions. Labeling has increased awareness concerning the content and nutritional value of the foods we eat. Unfortunately often we are not given the opportunity to acquire this information due to the environment in which the food is consumed, or individuals may not wish to be informed, with lifestyle choice being an important factor in food choice. Various food delivery platforms, such as fast casual restaurants, food courts, or corporate cafes may make it more difficult for consumers to be informed due to a lack of provided nutritional information, or placement of that information which makes it have less of an impact, and the limited time consumers may have to study the information. While there are new requirements that force businesses to provide nutritional information, the way in which this information is displayed, and the enforcement of rules for these displays, vary greatly across a broad spectrum of establishments, and often the consumer may not be aware the information is available even if they believe it is important and wish to study it. Likewise the information displayed may not be correlated or presented in a way that can lead to more informed choices. For instance a menu may display such information as caloric content, which is only a very small piece of a much larger nutritional picture, and fail to allow consumers to make informed comparative choices due to the limited information and time in which they have to make a decision.

Research Question

Our personal perceptions of why we make particular choices may not be entirely accurate. Likewise we may be influenced by food providers in ways that we fail to understand in both conscious and unconscious ways. It is not enough to just focus on what selection we make and how that selection affects our overall health and the implications this may have for society at large. Expanding our knowledge of the interactions between our own perceived elements of preference, and the influences projected and exerted within a particular environment, are crucial factors in understanding the complexities of food choice. The primary question this study would attempt to answer is; how do the pre-determined factors in an enclosed environment attempt to influence our food choices?

The Purpose of this Study

There has been an increased awareness for the importance of providing information such as caloric content to consumers that they might make more informed choices. Such an emphasis is unidirectional however and cannot take into account the reasoning, influences and mechanisms that are causing the consumer to make the choices that they do. It is important to try to understand the complex interactions that are involved in these choices, and this study attempts to begin to classify these interactions in a way that could allow for a much more nuanced approach to providing consumers with information in the future. Often we may enter an environment in which food is provided with a particular idea of what we wish to consume, but may end up with a very different product due to a number possible influences. This could include, but may not be limited to, advertising, sensory inputs and social interactions and many other subliminal and unconscious factors.

This study also analyzes and categorizes the efforts of the food providers to try to influence the choices made by the consumer within enclosed environments. It is important to try to understand the interaction within a micro-foodway (enclosed environments providing multiple concentrated opportunities for influence and food choice) between provider and consumer, the purposes and intentions of the actors on both sides of this relationship, and the end results of these interactions.

Methodology

The nature of the question presented in my hypothesis has required keeping an open mind and employing techniques that generate qualitative and quantitative data, and yet have remained flexible enough to allow for the inclusion of data that was not predicted before the inception of the study. For this research I have employed methods and techniques from all of the disciplines employed through my degree concentration including participant observation and ethnography, as well as quantitative nutritional analysis and peer-reviewed text analysis. I have examined over seventy sources in the preparation and process of this study using a wide range of media formats including books, magazines, journals, conference proceedings and web pages. In addition to doing a relatively exhaustive review and analysis of peer reviewed journals and seminal works by distinguished authorities on the key subjects, I have also been able to engage in some limited fieldwork in the enclosed environment to witness, where possible, the flow of consumers and influences on food choice within that environment, and map the apparent factors that are attempting to affect consumer choice. While the framework of the study employs methodology derived through theoretical approaches to preference and food choice, this research has had to run inductively to avoid operating within an overly narrow focus that would prevent the revealing of unexpected factors. One of these factors that emerged was the inability to be able to visually determine how the influences present in the environment were changing the decisions of the patrons, if indeed they were. Another was the possibility of a nutritional bias in the arrangement of the vendors within the food court. The combination of field research united with sound theoretical approaches and a foundation of peer-reviewed literature on the subject, provides a solid basis for creating hypothesis and formulating conclusions concerning the role that influences play in our choice of foods.

Literature Review

Food Choice by consumers has been studied extensively due to the economic implications for producers, with the emphasis on increased sales and profits. More recently there has been a concentration of efforts to study carefully what we eat and understand more about why we choose the foods we do, if indeed we have a choice at all, due to concerns over rising food related health concerns.. Although this has occurred at other times in the past the current movement began primarily as a way of increasing nutritional health, but now encompasses a wide range of social values and norms, many not related to sustenance. Study of food choice has important health implications particularly regarding the conditions of Diabetes, Obesity and Cardiovascular disease. The foods we eat represent a cultural and socioeconomic roadmap to who we are, if we care to decode the message, and understanding the cognitive mechanism of choice is fundamental to understanding what differentiates humans from other forms of life.

In this review of current literature examining the issue of food choice I attempted to gain an understanding of the current state of research concerning the dietary choices that we make and the reasons for doing so. In my research I have assessed information gained from peer-reviewed journals, books and international conference proceedings, as well as newspapers and web pages. The sources have emanated from within a number of academic disciplines including; Anthropology, Physiology, Behavioral Science, Psychology, Archaeology, Neuro Science and Genetics. The majority of the studies (both qualitative and quantitative) on the subject of food choice break down into one (or more) of six general categories; Socio-economics, Body Mass Index, Gender, Cultural specificity and Genetics. While some of the seminal works date back as far as the 1930’s, the majority of my sources were created recently, within the last five years, showing the growing recognition of the importance of this issue.

The psychology of food choice in humans relates to our sense of decision, and understanding the criteria we employ and why that criteria is important can tell who we are and where we come from. The earliest studies on choice concentrated on the effects of association, and embedded metadata, and measured the time it took to make a decision when various associations were introduced (Stroop, Ridley, 1935). Cognitive decisions are not made in a vacuum, they are never arbitrary or random even if we attempt to make them so. Stroop found that by changing the colors of the words that we were reading, for example spelling the color red in blue ink, subjects hesitated when deciding what the word meant longer than if it was colored in the color that the word spelled. This lead to the Stroop Task, a test of cognitive function with regards to association still employed by researchers today. In the Stroop test we can easily see what the association were that led to the hesitation, however in food choice they may or may not be so apparent.

There has been a global crisis with regards to food that has been exacerbated in modern times due to socio-cultural transformations (John H. Bodley, 2008). Such effects transform the food landscape and thus our choices of food, and break down according to gender, race, and economic status, genetics and a number of other factors. The primary driver of these changes has been the increased commercialization of food product across global distribution networks and the profits derived from such systems. Food choice has long been studied by companies who wish to increase sales by understanding the mechanisms that the brain employs regarding preference. The cultural dimensions of such marketing has become increasingly important as information systems shrink the globe. Indigenous cultural traditions are effected by mass globalization in which food choice can be influenced by the producer as well as the consumer, and as a result traditional foodways have been altered permanently (Smith, 2006). A number of methods have been used to study food choice both qualitative and quantitative. Some of the most recent involve Subjective Evidence-Based Ethnography used in conjunction with video to determine causes of choice in consumers, but most have done so with an eye toward marketing (Peter Jackson author, 2015; Shelley L. Koch, 2012; Werthmann et al., 2013). Evidence of socioeconomic differences in food choice are often determined through qualitative studies involving interviews and participant observation (Freedman, 2016; Tarasuk & Eakin, 2003; Toepel, Knebel, Hudry, le Coutre, & Murray, 2012) such studies can be valuable through psychological and video analysis. On the individual human level our decision making process can be influenced by forces both contrived and inadvertently created by outside forces. Three primary theoretical models of food choice have emerged; 1) The Random Utility Model (RUM) (Baltas & Doyle, 2001), 2) The Food Choice Process Model (Sobal & Bisogni, 2009) and 3) The Theory of Reasoned Action (Ajzen, 1991).

RUM’s have been employed extensively by the marketing industry and emerge from economic theory. They lie in contrast to economic consumption models which view the amount of a product or resource to be consumed as a constant variable. This model breaks down into three factors, first that a choice is a discrete event, meaning we either choose a particular brand based on say it’s packaging (1 carton versus .025 cartons) or we do not choose it, it is an all or nothing equation. Second that the brand or utility of a product varies among consumers as a random variable, and third that the choice is consistent with the perceived greatest utility of that product versus another. These can also be termed to be discrete choice models or qualitative choice models in economics. Instead of a quantitative decision based on how many among an infinite number of items we choose, discrete models are choices based on a finite number of items.

The Food Choice Process Model (FCPM) frames an individual’s thought processes, internal feelings and actions conceptualized by experiences and influences throughout one’s life. Based on these influences a person develops a cognitive decision process that guides their food and eating preferences. For example if we had a favorite aunt when we were a child whom we may have had a slight crush on, and that aunt liked to give us ham sandwiches, we may have developed a propensity to choose ham over turkey when ordering a sandwich. Likewise had there been a negative connotation connected to ham sandwiches, we may prefer turkey instead. Such attributions are simple when they are obvious, less so when they may exist without any conscious memory, lingering in our subconscious and altering our decisions.

The Theory of Reasoned Action was developed my Martin Fishbein and Icek Ajzen and is a predictive theory that stipulates that our actions regarding choice or preference emerge from two factors; our evaluations and the strengths of our beliefs. We may believe that in order to present our self as a viable mate a certain optimum body image is required, and consequently we must follow a particular dietary regimen, even if such restrictions have a negative effect on our overall health. Societal trends create expectations that affect our preferences, and self-perceptions have real world effects. Eating disorders are a relatively modern problem and reflect the increasing pressure for social acceptance with regards to body mass. The concept of restrained eating developed from the set point theory of obesity (Conner & Armitage, 2002) and demonstrates that restrained eaters may restrict their caloric intake with a “self-control” mechanism that underlies their choices. The underlying causes of this type of cognitive exercise may be catalyzed by any number of internal and external factors such as cultural awareness, class perceptions, or even nutritional need created through disease. Another important theory developed by Icek Ajzen and related to Martin Fishbein’s work is the Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1991), which has strong applications for this type of research. It provides important structural frameworks for analyzing the complexities surrounding the human decision process, and can be a driver for predictive data. Behavior and subjective norms coupled with perceived behavioral control converge to become individual intentions which then dictates decisions, essentially the link between one’s beliefs and behavior. Figure 1- Chart showing the process of Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behavior

The cultural dimensions of food choice are dense and reflect the complexity and diversity of human populations. Perceived ethnicity, cultural awareness, socioeconomic status, class mobility as well as a greater global awareness are all factors that contribute to the equation of what we choose to eat and why. A number of studies have focused on the relationship between biocultural influences and food choice, as well as genetics. These studies have identified the influence of genetic variability on chemosensory receptors across a wide range of bio-diverse populations, highlighting the need for a holistic integrated approach to understanding preference (Freedman, 2016; Incollingo Rodriguez, Finch, Buss, Guardino, & Tomiyama, 2015; Risso et al., 2017). In addition the process of enculturation continually shapes our choices in a dynamic ongoing process with outside influences vying against entrenched traditions. Latane’s Social Impact Theory ( 1981) attempts to explain the impact of social situations on the choices we make and involves three components; social forces, psychosocial law and multiplication versus division of impact (Conner & Armitage, 2002). Such theories can provide a framework for formulating questions for further research and study.

Gender plays an important role in our decisions with regard to food and there are distinct differences between the physiology of men and women that influence our perceptions and choices. Body image has traditionally been a consideration for women in regards to food choice although more recently this is extending across gender lines as obesity has become a cross gender effect (Mühlberg, Mathar, Villringer, Horstmann, & Neumann, 2016). Women are more likely to increase their caloric intake during times of stress than men, while at the same time enjoying a bias toward eating healthier foods and controlling body mass through food choice (Counihan & Kaplan, 2004; Mühlberg et al., 2016; Toepel et al., 2012). An organism’s relationship to its energy requirements can affect its psyche, and thus what it chooses to consume and how it acquires those resources. The perception, or memory of insufficient resources can have an impact on future decisions. An increase in the rate of obesity has been found to be associated with a lower socio-economic status, this is related to the fact that all social animals that perceive themselves as having subordinate status or low social rank demonstrate increased calorie intake and weight gain (Cheon & Hong, 2017).

Genetics has emerged as a major focus of research on preference and advances in neural imaging such as Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (FMRI) have opened new inroads into understanding the neural mechanisms and the genetic influences for eating disorders allowing researchers to map brain function. Obesity as well as other metabolic conditions are considered to have some genetic component which increase risk levels for a variety of eating behaviors (Grimm & Steinle, 2011). Evolutionary genetics can help us understand the underlying mechanisms of diseases related to metabolism by exposing how humans have adapted to dietary change. Fossil and archaeological records, including micro-abrasion patterns in dental fossils, and the measurement in stable isotope ratios in recovered bone can determine the percentage of specific resources consumed at the time the fossils first formed (Luca, Perry, & Rienzo, 2010; Rankinen & Bouchard, 2006; Risso et al., 2017). The term food choice is somewhat of a misnomer because often the choices are so limited as to be no choice at all. To present food banks have been the most tangible methods of directly effecting hunger, but the nature of the limited inconsistent supply chains for these organizations mean that the assistance can become largely symbolic (Tarasuk & Eakin, 2003).

Some recent studies have explored the relationship between choice/preference and Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) as the public has developed an increased awareness of this syndrome. Children with diagnosed ASD have been shown to have a much greater level of selectivity concerning what they eat based on such factors a texture, consistency, brand, temperature and color (Hubbard, Anderson, Curtin, Must, & Bandini, 2014). As a result these children experience a greater degree of nutritional deficiency than do children without ASD, and the parents of these children report increased stress and difficulties with relationships (Hyman et al., 2012; Suarez, Atchison, & Lagerwey, 2014). These finding could have important aspects that relate to food choice as it seems apparent that similar areas in the brain are being effected.

Field research

For this study I chose to analyze the Tyson’s Corner Center mall food court over a period of three months by visiting once every two weeks. I developed this time frame to be able to average the flow of people through the food court during various circumstances to try to adjust for variance according to time of day or week, as well as to see a change of seasons since the months were February, March and April. I have attempted to understand and map the interactions within these areas from two perspectives, that of the provider, and the consumer using the method of participant observation and ethnography. I visited in the morning, midday as well as in the evening, and I varied my visits between weekdays and weekend days. During the visits, which lasted from 1-2 hours generally I would note the number of people in the food court at one time, as well as the rate at which they entered the food court. I also tracked what direction they came from, as well as how they generally proceeded after entering.

The second phase of the study is the quantitative analysis of the providers of the food products within the food court. Each provider’s position within the court has been mapped as well as a nutritional dissection of their menu, and lastly their methods for attempting to manipulate the consumer’s decision through menu, location, advertising, décor, sensory output, and the providing of samples, and other influences.

Analysis

Tysons Corner Center is a large shopping mall located in Tysons Corner Virginia. Opened to the public in 1968, it includes over 2.2 million square feet of retail space, with 55 retail dining establishments all vying for a huge population that swell through the doors every day. Built as one of the first super-regional malls in the United States, it draws potential customers from multiple nearby states. Of the 55 dining options located throughout the mall, nine are located in a semi-circular food court on the third floor of the mall that serves a wide range of consumers that reflect the wide range of diversity found in the population of Fairfax County. The various food concepts within the food court each represent a particular cultural food style, probably none of which would be considered “authentic” in their country or region of origin, and rather they strive to appeal to a wide audience and thus tend to water down the attributes that had originally made these cuisines notable. The room that the court is located in is large, nearly half the size of a football field, and features high arched ceilings with embedded skylights as well as a balcony overlooking the floor below. The vendors, listed from left to right as they appear in the food court are; Pita Pouch, Sabrina’s Pollo, Charlie Chiangs Kwai, California Tortilla, Famiglia Pizzeria, Great Wraps, Taka Grille, Five Guys and Grill Kabob. They represent the following food styles or regional cuisines; Mediterranean, Latin, Chinese, Mexican, Italian, Mexican fusion, Japanese, American and Middle Eastern. Most of these establishments do not hold strictly to their particular cuisine style as all of their menus show a high degree of cultural crossover; for instance, Pita Pouch serves traditional Middle Eastern food such as hummus, falafel and chicken shawarma, but also French fries. Great Wraps, a Mediterranean concept includes cultural fusion items such a Chicken Caesar wrap and a buffalo chicken wrap. These types of crossover menu items are one of the many influences that can be found that subtly and not so subtly attempt to affect our choices. It is possible that fusion menu items such as this are intended to act as connective enticers, luring less adventuresome diners to try something on the menu that they are somewhat familiar with and then build their trust so they return and try the other items they provide.

                 Figure 2. Schematic showing layout of Tysons Corner Center Mall food court

The order in which the food vendors are presented from left to right is interesting but its interpretation could be fairly subjective. For instance we do not know if the vendors are placed in the original order the developers intended or even if they established the order in any particular manner at all. However when we analyze the nutritional data, an interesting pattern emerges. Primarily the order of vendors goes from the providers with the lowest caloric content to the vendors with the highest caloric content. Although it is not a perfect order, it does represent a trend. While each vendor has menu items of higher and lower calories, when taken as an average, this pattern emerges.

Nutritional analysis of California Tortilla’s “Classic Burrito”;

• CALORIES 00 34%
• TOTAL FAT 37G 41%
• SATURATED FAT 06G 75%
• SODIUM 00MG 74%
• TOTAL CARBS 59G 27%
• DIETARY FIBER 59G 30%
• PROTEIN 94G 48%
• SUGARS 29G 11%
• CHOLESTEROL 00MG 22%

*Note the highlighted red percentages which emphasize some of the most relevant health information.

Price is considered to be a major factor, if not the deciding element, in food choice. In this instance however all of the vendors have been preselected within a narrow range of price and so they do not necessarily compete amongst each other with price. That said, price is a determining factor in which vendors were selected to be located there and therefore the cost of an item has a great influence on whether it is available to you or not. For example no one in the food court is serving luxury food items such as lobster or caviar, and this has been factored into your initial decision to patronize this food court.

The factors within this enclosed environment that try to affect consumers’ decisions can be broken down into two primary two basic categories, interior and exterior, as well as five subsets that match the potential customers ability to sense the influences, that is; sight, sound, smell, taste, and touch. Some, such as a Buffalo chicken wraps could potentially act on all five senses simultaneously, as well as being both interior and exterior in nature.

Figure 3. Influences sorted by senses

These influences can be subtle, subliminal or painfully obvious. While every single item found within the enclosed environment is chosen by the developers in such a way that it is intended to increase sales, some decisions are made with other factors, such as cost, taking precedence and therefore their influence may be minimal. An example of this would be the chairs. The chairs that are chosen for the seating area could be of many possible styles, and each one of those styles would influence us in some way towards how we feel about the overall establishment and therefore how much money we might ultimately spend there. Heavy wooden chairs might send a message of solidity and tradition, or designer seating from Scandinavia could send messages of sophistication, the type of influence you might want in an urban upscale setting. This food court does not represent that type of establishment. Adjacent to the food court is a movie theatre and a large play area for children. A family oriented environment is what the developers appear to be attempting to create with an added feeling of upscale sophistication. Upon entering the food court, a customer would generally proceed from left to right. You could go from right to left if you chose to do so, however you would have to proceed a great deal out of your way by walking all the way to the other side of the room from where you have entered. This is possibly because the court was designed according to western cultural standards, and therefore may be trying to appeal to westerner mentalities even though Tyson’s Corner, Virginia is a very diverse area, and this is significant because it represents the first influence that a would-be consumer would encounter. So how would that effect our food choice? I will dwell on this topic, how these influences are attempting to help our decision process, in greater depth later in this paper but I will touch on it a bit here as well.

While we may not be able to draw a direct provable link as to how moving from left to right influences our choice of foods, we must try to understand the intent of those providing the influences wherever we can, and be aware that their desire, notwithstanding issues of cost, will always be to increase sales, not to maximize the public health. Since the first decision, i.e. the first food choice, we make is to come to the food court instead of one of the 46 other dining possibilities that exist at the mall, feeling comfortable, welcomed, and at home in the environment directly affects our choice of being there. Part of this decision process is based on subliminal factors, and a number of the influences in this study can be characterized as subliminal or unconscious. So while we may not be aware that the configuration of the food court landscape is attempting to make us feel culturally at ease, it does have an effect on us nonetheless, and, when coupled with other influences, could lead to our being repeat customers (Agarwal & Guirat, 2017).

Even as we encounter the cultural gravitational force exerted on us through the architectural design, we are simultaneously being bombarded with more confidence-building influences, and these actors work together in concert, thereby increasing their effectiveness. For example, as we sense moving in a clockwise fashion into the beginning of the food court, we are aware of the tiles under our feet, both seeing and feeling them. While we may not know it or understand it, each particular tile design represents a piece of cultural symbolism, tiles designs are iconic cultural symbols and they are designed to harken our minds to distant civilizations and artisans, in a way that is attempting to influence us. We are also breathing the air which has been scented through the use of a commercial automatic air freshening system, the particular scent chosen also meant to invoke cognitive action.

Conclusion

A large number of disparate factors interconnect to shape our decision-making process in regards to what we eat. Taken individually the may seem inconsequential, but when working together they form strong influencers as well as possible predictors of behavior. Controlled food environments such as food courts condense these factors intentionally in an effort to lure consumers and control their buying decisions. There were many limitations of this study. Most notably was the lack of insight into the cognitive mechanisms that the consumers I witnessed were engaged in as they traveled through the controlled environment. It was impossible to gain insight into this through observation alone. Further studies could include interviews that would better mitigate this shortcoming, and gain some insight into consumer thought processes in regards to food choice.

Another important factor that requires further study is the influence of caloric content. We know that this has tremendous implications for animals and it must not be ignored in research regarding humans. For example, the way in which the vendors are arranged may be related to caloric content, as the most popular vendors seem to have been put at the end of the food court, perhaps in an effort to make consumers inspect the less caloric content first possibly in an effort to give less desirable vendors a better chance against more popular competition? Certainly such a supposition is impossible to support without the input of the designers, and indeed without empirical evidence as to whether or not increased caloric content is a determinant for preference, but the importance of the potential implications mean such a possibility cannot be ignored. While a growing segment of consumers is driven by specific ideas of nutritional value which they use to inform their choices, the majority do not use such criteria as the primary driver for their food decisions. Further research is greatly needed to determine if there is a link between caloric content and the perceived desirability of a particular food vendor. The classification of these influential factors is important so that we might better understand the ways in which the gravitational pull of these efforts is influencing our decisions. We were able to identify that there were many structural factors (exterior) that predicated what foods were located at the food court for us to select, for instance federal laws that dictate the inspection of meats, as well as only accepting foods from known inspected facilities. This allows or prevents many food products from being available within this enclosed environment, such as wild foods and animals as you might see in an unregulated situation such as an open market. The architectural structure itself represents an exterior influence, including the style in which it is constructed and designed as well as the choice of location for both the mall and the food court within. The influences within the food court (interior) were numerous, with some being subliminal and others more obvious. While the intent behind each influence may not be able to be accurately ascertained, their existence and abundance are an undeniable sign of their influence. Flowers, choice of wood, color selection, menu design, music and visual effects such as mirrors, play areas, seating, as well as scented air are just some of the influences encapsulated in this environment. A great deal of effort has been made by those involved in the design and construction of this environment to conceive of a space that would affect consumers in such a way as to be able to influence our decision making process. These factors assail our five senses and they can be classified according to how we encounter them, although many may work on all our receptors simultaneously and may have been designed this way intentionally. There are a great deal of cultural influences at play as well through the use of representational cuisines. The melting pot of the American cultural landscape has led to a wide range of culturally specific foods being available at large venues such as the Tyson’s Corner Center. Each of us will respond differently to these offerings based on the enculturated beliefs and norms we carry inside us, as well as our individual genetic profiles. Making informed food choice is reliant on understanding the internal forces that drive individual preference, as well as the external elements that attempt to influence our decisions.

References

Agarwal, S., & Guirat, R. B. (2017). An empirical study of various factors, influencing the behavior of consumers towards fast food joints in Indian Market. Independent Journal of Management & Production, 8(4), 1341–1364.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978 (91)90020-T

Baltas, G., & Doyle, P. (2001). Random utility models in marketing research: a survey. Journal of Business Research, 51(2), 115–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963 (99)00058-2

Cheon, B. K., & Hong, Y.-Y. (2017). Mere experience of low subjective socioeconomic status stimulates appetite and food intake. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(1), 72–77. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1607330114

Conner, M., & Armitage, C. J. (2002). The social psychology of food. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Counihan, C., & Kaplan, S. L. (Eds.). (2004). Food and gender: identity and power (Reprint). London: Routledge.

Delaney Burke, J. (2011). Just Food: Obesity Trends Demand System Strategies. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 5(3), 222–228. https://doi.org/10.1177/1559827611398855

Delaney, M., & McCarthy, M. (2011). Food Choice and Health across the Life Course: A Qualitative Study Examining Food Choice in Older Irish Adults. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 17(2–3), 114–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10454446.2011.548717

Freedman, I. (2016). Cultural specificity in food choice – The case of ethnography in Japan. Appetite, 96(Supplement C), 138–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.09.006

Grimm, E. R., & Steinle, N. I. (2011). Genetics of eating behavior: established and emerging concepts. Nutrition Reviews, 69(1), 52–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-4887.2010.00361.x

Hardcastle, S., Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C., & Chatzisarantis, N. (2015). Food Choice and Nutrition: A Social Psychological Perspective. Nutrients, 7(10), 8712–8715. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu7105424

Hubbard, K. L., Anderson, S. E., Curtin, C., Must, A., & Bandini, L. G. (2014). A Comparison of Food Refusal Related to Characteristics of Food in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Typically Developing Children. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 114(12), 1981–1987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2014.04.017

Hyman, S. L., Stewart, P. A., Schmidt, B., Cain, U., Lemcke, N., Foley, J. T., … Ng, P. K. (2012). Nutrient Intake From Food in Children With Autism. Pediatrics, 130(Supplement 2), S145–S153. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2012-0900L

Incollingo Rodriguez, A. C., Finch, L. E., Buss, J., Guardino, C. M., & Tomiyama, A. J. (2015). An experimental field study of weight salience and food choice. Appetite, 89(Supplement C), 215–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.02.016

John H. Bodley. (2008). Anthropology and contemporary human problems (5th ed..).

Luca, F., Perry, G. H., & Rienzo, A. D. (2010). Evolutionary Adaptations to Dietary Changes. Annual Review of Nutrition, 30(1), 291–314. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-nutr-080508-141048

Lyerly, J. E., & Reeve, C. L. (2015). Development and validation of a measure of food choice values. Appetite, 89(Supplement C), 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.01.019

Mühlberg, C., Mathar, D., Villringer, A., Horstmann, A., & Neumann, J. (2016). Stopping at the sight of food – How gender and obesity impact on response inhibition. Appetite, 107, 663–676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.08.121

Peter Jackson author. (2015). Anxious appetites: food and consumer culture.

Rankinen, T., & Bouchard, C. (2006). Genetics of Food Intake and Eating Behavior Phenotypes in Humans. Annual Review of Nutrition, 26(1), 413–434. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.nutr.26.061505.111218

Risso, D. S., Giuliani, C., Antinucci, M., Morini, G., Garagnani, P., Tofanelli, S., & Luiselli, D. (2017). A bio-cultural approach to the study of food choice: The contribution of taste genetics, population and culture. Appetite, 114(Supplement C), 240–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.03.046

Shelley L. Koch. (2012). A theory of grocery shopping: food, choice and conflict (English ed..). London ; New York: Berg.

Smith, M. L. (2006). The Archaeology of Food Preference. American Anthropologist, 108(3), 480–493. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.2006.108.3.480

Sobal, J., & Bisogni, C. A. (2009). Constructing Food Choice Decisions. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 38(1), 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-009-9124-5

Stroop, Ridley, J. (1935). STUDIES OF INTERFERENCE IN SERIAL VERBAL REACTIONS.

Suarez, M. A., Atchison, B. J., & Lagerwey, M. (2014). Phenomenological Examination of the Mealtime Experience for Mothers of Children with Autism and Food Selectivity. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy; Bethesda, 68(1), 102–107.

Tarasuk, V., & Eakin, J. M. (2003). Charitable food assistance as symbolic gesture: an ethnographic study of food banks in Ontario. Social Science & Medicine, 56(7), 1505–1515. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536 (02)00152-1

Toepel, U., Knebel, J.-F., Hudry, J., le Coutre, J., & Murray, M. M. (2012). Gender and Weight Shape Brain Dynamics during Food Viewing. PLoS ONE, 7(5). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036778

Werthmann, J., Roefs, A., Nederkoorn, C., Mogg, K., Bradley, B. P., & Jansen, A. (2013). Attention bias for food is independent of restraint in healthy weight individuals—An eye tracking study. Eating Behaviors, 14(3), 397–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eatbeh.2013.06.005