Microsoft Word 2007 ichrie conference Proceedings Final-Final 06-06-07. doc

The relative importance of menu selection attributes 
The results of conjoint analysis are presented in table 2. 
Pearson’s R
2
is an index which means the 
suitability of the conjoint model. 
Kendall’s tau
is also another index which means the suitability of the conjoint 
model. When the value of Pearson’s R
2
is over 0.6 (the closer to 1, the better for the suitability of the conjoint 
model) and when Kendall’s tau is over 0.5, the model is suitable for the conjoint analysis. In the result of conjoint 
analysis, Pearson's R
2
was 0.858 (p < 0.01) and Kendall’s tau is 0.643 (p < 0.05), therefore the model used for this 
study can be acceptable as a conjoint analysis model.
The relative importance of the menu attributes is the percentage of utility range in relation to the total 
variation. The total variation is the sum of score ranges of each attribute (Green & Srinvasan, 1990). The 
respondents placed the greatest importance on taste (67.38%) and second greatest on price (16.77%) with nutrition 
(11.59%) and appearance (4.27%) respectively. The results of this study are consistent with the Koo et al. (1990) 
and Seo (2005) studies which found the taste of foods as the most important factor among restaurant selecting 
attributes and quality attributes of dining service for older adults. Even though we would expect that young adults 
will be more sensitive to price than taste of a menu, the result showed that they perceive the taste of a menu as the 
most important factor similar to other age groups.
The study done by Glanz et al. (1998), reported that taste was the most important influence on food 
choices, followed by cost, nutrition, convenience, and weight control. But they also pointed out that the customers’ 
age and a predisposition toward a healthy lifestyle, especially in the area of nutrition and weight control, were 
significant influences on food consumption. Therefore, since the age group we tested usually has limited 
discretionary income, price was expected to be the dominate attribute.
We also found the nutrition facet of a menu to be important and highly considered by young adults through 
the results of both the pre-survey and the survey, and surprisingly, it preceded the appearance of a menu item in 
importance. This result implies the nutrition issue has broadened in the young adult segment and suggests the 
necessity for developing and applying nutritious menu items in campus dining.
According to the reports of the National Restaurant Association (NRA, 2006) for the restaurant industry 
forecast, seventy-two percent of restaurant customers say they are trying to eat healthier (Cobe, 2006). A study 
which examined the quick service restaurant customer’s attitude versus behavior toward healthy menu items proved 
this healthy eating trend. The results showed that twenty-five percent of the population has a positive attitude toward 
nutrition and healthy eating and healthy menu item sales increased and sales of less healthy side items such as french 
fries or onion rings decreased significantly over the past three years (DiPietro et al., 2004). This recent healthy 
eating trend of restaurant customers is increasing nationwide and young adults are getting more interested in a more 
healthful dietary life style. 
Table 2 
Relative Importance of Menu Attributes 
Attributes 
Level 
Utilities 
Relative importance (%) 
Bland -.2669 
Taste 
Good .2669 
67.38 
Picture A(bad appearance) 
-.0169 
Appearance 
Picture C (good appearance) .0169 
4.27 
$ 3.95 (low) 
.0664 
Price 
$ 6.00 (high) 
-.0664 
16.77 
Low Calorie/Fat 
.0459 
Nutrition 
High Calorie/Fat 
-.0459 
11.59 

---