RESEARCH REPORT

A multilevel analysis of socioeconomic (small area) differences in household food purchasing behaviour

G Turrell¹, T Blakely², C Patterson¹ and B Oldenburg¹

¹ School of Public Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
² Department of Public Health, Wellington School of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Dr G Turrell
School of Public Health, Queensland University of Technology, Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, 4059; g.turrell{at}qut.edu.au

Study objective: To examine the association between area and individual level socioeconomic status (SES) and food purchasing behaviour.

Design: The sample comprised 1000 households and 50 small areas. Data were collected by face to face interview (66.4% response rate). SES was measured using a composite area index of disadvantage (mean 1026.8, SD = 95.2) and household income. Purchasing behaviour was scored as continuous indices ranging from 0 to 100 for three food types: fruits (mean 50.5, SD = 17.8), vegetables (61.8, 15.2), and grocery items (51.4, 17.6), with higher scores indicating purchasing patterns more consistent with dietary guideline recommendations.

Setting: Brisbane, Australia, 2000.

Participants: Persons responsible for their household’s food purchasing.

Main results: Controlling for age, gender, and household income, a two standard deviation increase on the area SES measure was associated with a 2.01 unit increase on the fruit purchasing index (95% CI -0.49 to 4.50). The corresponding associations for vegetables and grocery foods were 0.60 (-1.36 to 2.56) and 0.94 (-1.35 to 3.23). Before controlling for household income, significant area level differences were found for each food, suggesting that clustering of household income within areas (a composition effect) accounted for the purchasing variability between them.

Conclusions: Living in a socioeconomically advantaged area was associated with a tendency to purchase healthier food, however, the association was small in magnitude and the 95% CI for area SES included the null. Although urban areas in Brisbane are differentiated on the basis of their socioeconomic characteristics, it seems unlikely that where you live shapes your procurement of food over and above your personal characteristics.

Keywords: socioeconomic status; diet; health inequalities

Abbreviations: BFS, Brisbane food study; SSD, statistical sub-division; CCD, census collectors district; IRSD, index of relative socioeconomic disadvantage; ABS, Australian Bureau of Statistics; SES, socioeconomic status

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Article

On neighbourhoods, communities and inequalities, and something on sexually transmitted infections

Carlos Alvarez-Dardet and John R Ashton
J Epidemiol Community Health 2004 58: 161. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Chow, C. K., Lock, K., Teo, K., Subramanian, S., McKee, M., Yusuf, S. (2009). Environmental and societal influences acting on cardiovascular risk factors and disease at a population level: a review. Int J Epidemiol 0: dyn258v1-dyn258 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Inglis, V, Ball, K, Crawford, D (2008). Socioeconomic variations in women's diets: what is the role of perceptions of the local food environment?. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 62: 191-197 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Pearce, J, Hiscock, R, Blakely, T, Witten, K (2008). The contextual effects of neighbourhood access to supermarkets and convenience stores on individual fruit and vegetable consumption. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 62: 198-201 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Li, J., Wang, Y. (2008). Tracking of Dietary Intake Patterns Is Associated with Baseline Characteristics of Urban Low-Income African-American Adolescents. J. Nutr. 138: 94-100 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Papas, M. A., Alberg, A. J., Ewing, R., Helzlsouer, K. J., Gary, T. L., Klassen, A. C. (2007). The Built Environment and Obesity. Epidemiol Rev 0: mxm009v1- [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Fogelholm, M., Valve, R., Absetz, P., Heinonen, H., Uutela, A., Patja, K., Karisto, A., Konttinen, R., Makela, T., Nissinen, A., Jallinoja, P., Nummela, O., Talja, M. (2006). Rural--urban differences in health and health behaviour: A baseline description of a community health-promotion programme for the elderly. Scand J Public Health 34: 632-640 [Abstract]  
• Cummins, S., Macintyre, S. (2006). Food environments and obesity--neighbourhood or nation?. Int J Epidemiol 35: 100-104 [Full Text]  
• Kavanagh, A. M, Goller, J. L, King, T., Jolley, D., Crawford, D., Turrell, G. (2005). Urban area disadvantage and physical activity: a multilevel study in Melbourne, Australia. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 59: 934-940 [Abstract] [Full Text]