Food choices are determined by intrinsic and extrinsic product characteristics, biological and physiological features, psychological factors, and situational and socio-cultural factors. Self-determination theory offers the explanation of health behavior change identifying motivations located along a continuum of autonomy. Another approach to the motivations guiding health behaviors, including food choices, relies on distinguishing thematic categories. Health motivations seem to be an obvious determinant of health behaviors, but final decisions regarding health are also the effect of other types of motivations such as economic, cultural, or emotional. The role of marketing pressure in modern society is perceived to be an important source of motivation for purchasing food and other products. The Motivation-Opportunity-Ability (MOA) framework was initially proposed in order to explain the processing of brand information from advertisements and was later expanded to other areas, including health and nutritional behaviors. The aim of this study was the analysis of determinants of food choices. We have developed a common regression model including six categories of motivations addressed by the Eating Motivations Scale and three health literacy types corresponding with element of ability from the MOA framework, adjusted for socio-demographic factors, health status, and the use of the Internet and TV. The analysis was performed on data from a computer-assisted web-based interviewing (CAWI) survey among 2008 adult Internet users completed in May 2022. The uni- and multivariate linear regression models were developed with the Index of Unhealthy Food Choices (IUFC), calculated based on the responses to items asking about the frequency of the consumption of twelve food categories. Univariate modeling revealed that IUFC is significantly associated with health, food, and e-health literacies and with five out of six eating motivations. However, the multivariate regression model yielded significant associations only for eating motivations but not for the three literacy scores. Health motivation was negatively associated with IUFC (B, standard error (SE): 0.83, 0.07; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.98-0.69), but positively with emotional (B, SE: 0.22, 0.04; 95% CI: 0.14-0.3), economic (B, SE: 0.41, 0.08; 95% CI: 0.25-0.56), and marketing (B, SE: 0.62, 0.08; 95% CI: 0.47-0.78) motivations. Our findings suggest that motivations guiding food choices may prevail over the element of 'ability' distinguished in the frameworks and models that explain people's behaviors, including behaviors relating to health. Thus, it is essential to emphasize development of appropriate motivations and not only to provide knowledge and skills. Furthermore, one should also remember motivations other than health motivations when searching for the determinants of health behaviors.
Keywords: advertising; digital health literacy; e-health literacy; eating motivations; food choices; food literacy; health literacy; marketing.