Formative Research to Understand the Psychographics of 1% Milk Consumption in a Low-Income Audience

Abstract

A clear understanding of the knowledge, perceptions, beliefs, attitudes, and values of those whose behavior we hope to change is an essential task in a social marketing project. This formative research used mixed methods to identify consumer psychographics about high-fat milk among a low-income priority audience. High-fat milk users believe they choose the type of milk that is the healthiest for them and their families but had poor milk nutrition knowledge and an inaccurate appraisal of low-fat milk. Habit and taste preferences reinforced high-fat milk use but 2% milk users, a group that already adapted to reduced-fat milk, were the audience segment most willing to consider low-fat milk use. Low-fat milk use can be promoted by raising awareness that 2% milk is not low fat and addressing knowledge deficiencies while assuring the priority audience that 1% milk has all of the vitamins and minerals of whole or 2% milk but with less fat. The resonance of the promotion can be enhanced by incorporating words that “work” such as vitamins, minerals, healthy, choice, habit, and avoiding the words “switch” and “skim” that were viewed negatively by this low-income audience.

Reactions to a Low-Fat Milk Social Media Intervention in the US: The Choose 1% Milk Campaign

“…Again, we expected to encounter this belief, as it appeared in the formative research [12,14], and it has appeared in previous research on low-fat milk [28]. These comments affirm the relevance of key messages and the need to repeat messages challenging strongly held beliefs to create a shift in attitudes [29].…”

“…This theme is similar to the familiarity motive from the Food Choice Questionnaire [26], in which people said they chose a food because it "is what I usually eat" or "is like the food I ate when I was a child." ONIE formative research also identified this theme [12,14]. As its strategy to reduce familiarity as a barrier to low-fat milk use, when online comments promoted whole or 2% milk, the ONIE team offered no response; but when comments supported low-fat milk, ONIE "liked" the comments and crafted responses affirming the behavior.…”

“…This audience segment claims to select food to promote health. Regardless of the type of milk consumed, milk users often identified health benefits as a motivating factor for the type of milk used [12,14], a factor identified as influencing food choices generally as well [26]. This audience segment wants current scientific evidence of the health benefit and resolution of conflicting nutritional advice.…”

“…The tag line was "Choose 1% Milk", and the secondary tag line was "A Healthy Family Choice" (see Figure 2). The emphasis on choice came from studies of political communication by Luntz [13], and our own formative research that showed a positive reaction to messages conferring autonomy [14]. Similar to our previous intervention, the campaigns' key messages sought to dispel the most common myths held by SNAP recipients about 1% milk [14] including the differences in the fat content between 2% and 1% milk, that 1% milk has the same vitamins and minerals as whole milk, 1% milk is not watered-down, and 1% milk is recommended for children age two and older.…”

Research to Understand Milk Consumption Behaviors in a Food-Insecure Low-Income SNAP Population in the US

“…Further, these and other questions were used during the formative focus group research [41], and the ones included in this study had the most probative value. All data were self-reported.…”