Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Conceptual Considerations and Methodological Challenges to Measuring Food Acceptance During Infancy

  • REVIEW
  • Published:
Current Nutrition Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The purpose of this review is to (1) present a conceptual definition of infant food acceptance, (2) explore methodological challenges to measuring different components of food acceptance, and (3) provide recommendations for future research on food acceptance during infancy.

Recent Findings

Infant food acceptance includes separate but overlapping components: wanting, liking, and consumption. Recent evidence suggests that although these components are often correlated, there is variability in the sensitivity of these measures to detect differences in infants’ responses to target foods.

Summary

To date, consumption and caregiver perceptions of liking have been the primary outcome measures of interest in studies of infant food acceptance. More diverse and precise measures across the three components of infant food acceptance are needed to address a wider scope of research questions, which would in turn strengthen the interpretability and translational potential of research in this area.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Birch LL, Doub AE. Learning to eat: birth to age 2 y. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014;99(3):723S-S728. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.113.069047.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Momin SR, Chung KR, Olson BH. A qualitative study to understand positive and negative child feeding behaviors of immigrant Asian Indian mothers in the US. Matern Child Health J. 2014;18(7):1699–710. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-013-1412-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Patrick H, Nicklas TA. A review of family and social determinants of children’s eating patterns and diet quality. J Am Coll Nutr. 2005;24(2):83–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/07315724.2005.10719448.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Nicklaus S, Boggio V, Chabanet C, Issanchou S. A prospective study of food preferences in childhood. Food Qual Prefer. 2004;15(7–8):805–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2004.02.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Nicklaus S, Boggio V, Chabanet C, Issanchou S. A prospective study of food variety seeking in childhood, adolescence and early adult life. Appetite. 2005;44(3):289–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2005.01.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Switkowski KM, Gingras V, Rifas-Shiman SL, Oken E. Patterns of complementary feeding behaviors predict diet quality in early childhood. Nutrients. 2020;12(3):810. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu12030810.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Okronipa H, Quezada-Sánchez AD, Johnson SL, Rawlinson C, Pacheco-Miranda S, Venosa López M, et al. Effect of added sugar on the consumption of a lipid-based nutrient supplement among 7–24- month-old children. Nutrients. 2020;12(10):3069.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Johnson SL, Shapiro AL, Moding KJ, Flesher A, Davis K, Fisher JO. Infant and toddler consumption of sweetened and unsweetened lipid nutrient supplements after 2-week home repeated exposures. J Nutr. 2021.

  9. Borg B, Mihrshahi S, Griffin M, Sok D, Chhoun C, Laillou A, et al. Acceptability of locally‐produced Ready‐to‐Use Supplementary Food (RUSF) for children under two years in Cambodia: a cluster randomised trial. Matern Child Nutr. 2019;15(3):e12780. https://doi.org/10.1111/mcn.12780.

  10. Forestell CA, Mennella JA. More than just a pretty face. The relationship between infant’s temperament, food acceptance, and mothers’ perceptions of their enjoyment of food. Appetite. 2012;58(3):1136–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2012.03.005.

  11. Moding KJ, Birch LL, Stifter CA. Infant temperament and feeding history predict infants’ responses to novel foods. Appetite. 2014;83:218–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2014.08.030.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Moding KJ, Stifter CA. Does temperament underlie infant novel food responses?: continuity of approach–withdrawal from 6 to 18 months. Child Dev. 2018;89(4):e444–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rapson JP, von Hurst PR, Hetherington MM, Mazahery H, Conlon CA. Starting complementary feeding with vegetables only increases vegetable acceptance at 9 months: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqac080.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. • Van Vliet M, Mesman J, Schultink J, De Vries J, Vereijken C, Rippe R, et al. Baby’s first bites: association between observed maternal feeding behavior and infant vegetable intake and liking. Appetite. 2021;165:105316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105316. Important emprical demonstration of the importance of offering behavior.

  15. Mennella JA, Reiter AR, Daniels LM. Vegetable and fruit acceptance during infancy: impact of ontogeny, genetics, and early experiences. Adv Nutr. 2016;7(1):211S-S219. https://doi.org/10.3945/an.115.008649.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Blissett J, Fogel A. Intrinsic and extrinsic influences on children’s acceptance of new foods. Physiol Behav. 2013;121:89–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2013.02.013.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Johnson SL, Moding KJ, Grimm KJ, Flesher AE, Bakke AJ, Hayes JE. Infant and toddler responses to bitter-tasting novel vegetables: findings from the Good Tastes Study. J Nutr. 2021.

  18. •• Hetherington M, Madrelle J, Nekitsing C, Barends C, de Graaf C, Morgan S, et al. Developing a novel tool to assess liking and wanting in infants at the time of complementary feeding–The Feeding Infants: Behaviour and Facial Expression Coding System (FIBFECS). Food Qual Prefer. 2016;48:238–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.09.010. Behavioral coding scheme to assess wanting and liking.

  19. •• Nekitsing C, Madrelle J, Barends C, de Graaf C, Parrott H, Morgan S, et al. Application and validation of the Feeding Infants: Behaviour and Facial Expression Coding System (FIBFECS) to assess liking and wanting in infants at the time of complementary feeding. Food Qual Prefer. 2016;48:228–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.09.012. Empirical demonstration of associations between wanting, liking, and consumption.

  20. Moding KJ, Bonvecchio Arenas A, Rawlinson C, Okronipa H, Pacheco‐Miranda S, Boenig R, et al. Development of a live coding method to assess infant/toddler food acceptance. Matern Child Nutr. 2022:e13348. https://doi.org/10.1111/mcn.13348.

  21. Hodges EA, Johnson SL, Hughes SO, Hopkinson JM, Butte NF, Fisher JO. Development of the responsiveness to child feeding cues scale. Appetite. 2013;65:210–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Hodges EA, Wasser HM, Colgan BK, Bentley ME. Development of feeding cues during infancy and toddlerhood. Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2016;41(4):244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pesch MH, Lumeng JC. Methodological considerations for observational coding of eating and feeding behaviors in children and their families. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017;14(1):170. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-017-0619-3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Chorney JM, McMurtry CM, Chambers CT, Bakeman R. Developing and modifying behavioral coding schemes in pediatric psychology: a practical guide. J Pediatr Psychol. 2015;40(1):154–64. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsu099.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Forestell CA, Mennella JA. Early determinants of fruit and vegetable acceptance. Pediatrics. 2007;120(6):1247–54. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2007-0858.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ekman P, Friesen W. The facial action coding system. Palo Alto, CA. 1978.

  27. Ekman P, Friesen W, Hagar J. Facial Action Coding System on CD-ROM. Salt Lake City, UT. 2002.

  28. Oster H. Baby FACS: Facial action coding system for infants and young children. New York: New York University; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  29. • Forestell CA, Mennella JA. The relationship between infant facial expressions and food acceptance. Curr Nutr Rep. 2017;6(2):141–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13668-017-0205-y. Review of the evidence base on orofacial reactivity in infants.

  30. Ustun B, Reissland N, Covey J, Schaal B, Blissett J. Flavor sensing in utero and emerging discriminative behaviors in the human fetus. Psychol Sci. 2022;33(10):1651–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976221105460.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Steiner JE, Glaser D, Hawilo ME, Berridge KC. Comparative expression of hedonic impact: affective reactions to taste by human infants and other primates. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2001;25(1):53–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Mennella JA, Forestell CA, Morgan LK, Beauchamp GK. Early milk feeding influences taste acceptance and liking during infancy. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009;90(3):780S-S788. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.2009.27462O.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Rosenstein D, Oster H. Differential facial responses to four basic tastes in newborns. Child Dev. 1988:1555–68. https://doi.org/10.2307/1130670.

  34. Schwartz C, Issanchou S, Nicklaus S. Developmental changes in the acceptance of the five basic tastes in the first year of life. Br J Nutr. 2009;102(9):1375–85. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114509990286.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Doty R, Shaw M. Taste and smell. In: Marshall M, Janette B, editors. Encyclopedia of Infant and Early Childhood Development: Oxford: Academic Press; 2008. p. 299–308.

  36. Haro-Vicente JF, Bernal-Cava MJ, Lopez-Fernandez A, Ros-Berruezo G, Bodenstab S, Sanchez-Siles LM. Sensory acceptability of infant cereals with whole grain in infants and young children. Nutrients. 2017;9(1):65. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu9010065.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Hetherington MM, Schwartz C, Madrelle J, Croden F, Nekitsing C, Vereijken CM, et al. A step-by-step introduction to vegetables at the beginning of complementary feeding. The effects of early and repeated exposure. Appetite. 2015;84:280–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2014.10.014.

  38. Fries LR, Van der Horst K, Moding KJ, Hughes SO, Johnson SL. Consistency between parent-reported feeding practices and behavioral observation during toddler meals. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2019;51(10):1159–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2019.08.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. • Madrelle J, Lange C, Boutrolle I, Valade O, Weenen H, Monnery-Patris S, et al. Development of a new in-home testing method to assess infant food liking. Appetite. 2017;113:274–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.03.002. Development of alternative approach to assessing perceptions of liking.

  40. Fildes A, Lopes C, Moreira P, Moschonis G, Oliveira A, Mavrogianni C, et al. An exploratory trial of parental advice for increasing vegetable acceptance in infancy. Br J Nutr. 2015;114(2):328–36. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114515001695.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Spill MK, Johns K, Callahan EH, Shapiro MJ, Wong YP, Benjamin-Neelon SE, et al. Repeated exposure to food and food acceptability in infants and toddlers: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr. 2019;109(Supplement_1):978S-89S.

  42. Satter E. The feeding relationship: problems and interventions. J Pediatr. 1990;117(2):S181–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Lohse B, Satter E. Use of an observational comparative strategy demonstrated construct validity of a measure to assess adherence to the satter division of responsibility in feeding. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2021;121(6):1143–56. e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2020.11.008.

  44. Orrell-Valente JK, Hill LG, Brechwald WA, Dodge KA, Pettit GS, Bates JE. “Just three more bites”: an observational analysis of parents’ socialization of children’s eating at mealtime. Appetite. 2007;48(1):37–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2006.06.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Shloim N, Shafiq I, Blundell-Birtill P, Hetherington M. Infant hunger and satiety cues during the first two years of life: developmental changes of within meal signalling. Appetite. 2018;128:303–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2018.05.144.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Johnson SL, Moding KJ. Introducing hard-to-like foods to infants and toddlers: mothers’ perspectives and children’s experiences about learning to accept novel foods. Building future health and well-being of thriving toddlers and young children. Nestle Nurtition Institute Workshop Series, Basel, Karger; 2020. p. 88–99.

  47. Johnson SL. Developmental and environmental influences on young children’s vegetable preferences and consumption. Adv Nutr. 2016;7(1):220S-S231. https://doi.org/10.3945/an.115.008706.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Moding KJ, Flesher A, Lucitt H, Bakke A, Hayes J, Johnson S. The Good Tastes Study: exploring caregiver feeding persistence and the roles of perceived infant liking, child temperament, and caregiver food neophobia. Curr Dev Nutr. 2018;2(11). https://doi.org/10.1093/cdn/nzy040.

  49. Remy E, Issanchou S, Chabanet C, Nicklaus S. Repeated exposure of infants at complementary feeding to a vegetable puree increases acceptance as effectively as flavor-flavor learning and more effectively than flavor-nutrient learning. J Nutr. 2013;143(7):1194–200. https://doi.org/10.3945/jn.113.175646.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Palacios C, Rivas-Tumanyan S, Santiago-Rodríguez EJ, Sinigaglia O, Ríos EM, Campos M, et al. A semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire validated in Hispanic infants and toddlers aged 0 to 24 months. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2017;117(4):526–35. e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2016.12.010.

  51. Kral TV, Rauh EM. Eating behaviors of children in the context of their family environment. Physiol Behav. 2010;100(5):567–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2010.04.031.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Boak R, Virgo-Milton M, Hoare A, De Silva A, Gibbs L, Gold L, et al. Choosing foods for infants: a qualitative study of the factors that influence mothers. Child Care Health Dev. 2016;42(3):359–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.12323.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Venkatesh S, DeJesus JM. Studying children’s eating at home: using synchronous videoconference sessions to adapt to COVID-19 and beyond. Front Psychol. 2021:3088. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.703373.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Human Development & Family Science, Purdue University, 1200 Mitch Daniels Blvd, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA

    Kameron J. Moding & Elizabeth I. Kielb

Authors
  1. Kameron J. Moding
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elizabeth I. Kielb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kameron J. Moding.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Kameron J. Moding is the director of the Child Temperament & Health Lab (CTHL) at Purdue University, which is funded by multiple organizations to study infant and child food acceptance. In the past 3 years, the CTHL has been funded by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute funded in part by the National Institutes of Health-National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, and the Beef Checkoff. The CTHL has also received food donations from Stahlbush Island Farms (Corvallis, OR). In the past 3 years, KJM has received salary support from USDA, the Beef Checkoff, and the Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition, and EIK has received salary support from USDA and a research renewal award from the Purdue University College of Health and Human Sciences. Both authors have received salary support from the Purdue University Department of Human Development and Family Science.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

All reported studies/experiments with human or animal subjects performed by the authors have been previously published and complied with all applicable ethical standards (including the Helsinki declaration and its amendments, institutional/national research committee standards, and international/national/institutional guidelines).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moding, K., Kielb, E.I. Conceptual Considerations and Methodological Challenges to Measuring Food Acceptance During Infancy. Curr Nutr Rep 12, 407–415 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13668-023-00480-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13668-023-00480-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation