Food Quality and Preference 27 (2013) 223229

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Food Quality and Preference

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/foodqual

The foodservice industry: Eating out is more than just a meal q

John S.A. Edwards
Foodservice and Applied Nutrition Research Group, Bournemouth University, Poole, Dorset, BH12 5BB, United Kingdom

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The prevalence of eating out of the home is increasing, as is the range of eating outlets and types of food.
Received 5 October 2011 The foodservice industry is commonly classied into two sectors: rstly, the prot, private or commercial
Received in revised form 31 January 2012 sector and secondly, the cost, public or welfare/institutional sector, both of which are integral and grow-
Accepted 9 February 2012
ing components of most economies.
Available online 18 February 2012
Eating and eating out involve more than simply matching meals with consumers and the ingestion of
food, and includes a myriad of other factors, all of which can affect the eating out experience. When eval-
Keywords:
uating this, it is important that all factors are taken into account and not simply the food or meal.
Foodservice
Eating out
Together they have important implications, for example, in product development where, in addition to
basic lab and sensory work, testing needs to be moved into a realistic setting where consumption is
to take place. Only then can a true understanding be gained, and the product properly evaluated.
2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Eating out of the home is becoming more prevalent; hence inter
alia, an increasingly important source of nutrients. We eat out of
the home for a variety of reasons, such as, pleasure, celebratory
and business, and the number and range of outlets where this
can be done, has increased considerably in recent years.
Worldwide, the foodservice industry sales are US$ 2.1 trillion
(Euromonitor International, 2009) representing in the order of
10% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and employing one in 10
of the workforce. However, when considering the foodservice
industry and eating out, the focus, particularly with the profusion
of celebrity chefs, is often restricted to the food itself. Yet eating
and eating out are not simply the ingestion of nutrients and there
are a myriad of other factors, which need to be taken into consid-
eration in the understanding and enjoyment of the meal
experience.
The purpose of this paper is to provide a broad overview and
therefore a better understanding of the foodservice industry; iden-
tify some of the challenges which it faces and in doing so, consider
not only the food, but also the totality of the eating out experience.
2. The foodservice industry
Firstly, to clarify what is understood by foodservice, as the term
is not only spelt differently (Food Service, UK; Foodservice, US), but
q (Euromonitor International, 2011). In terms of size and types of
This paper is based on a Keynote Talk originally given at the 9th Pangborn
Sensory Science Symposium held in Toronto, Canada, 48 September 2011.
Tel.: +44 (0)1202 691637.
E-mail address: edwardsj@bournemouth.ac.uk
also the word catering has a different meaning on each side of the
Atlantic. For the purpose of this paper, foodservice is dened as:
The serviced provision of food and beverages (meals) purchased
out of the home but which may be consumed both in and out of
the home (Adapted from: Edwards and Overstreet, 2009).
The important aspect to note is that it is a serviced provision.
Ready-meals, for example, can be purchased in a supermarket
where there are elements of service in the meal preparation and
at the checkout. However, in foodservice, the service component
tends to be more comprehensive, delivered throughout the meal
and in many cases equally as important as the food itself.
Classifying the foodservice industry can be undertaken in a
number of ways; one of which is to group the industry into two
sectors, (Fig. 1). Firstly, the prot, private or commercial sector,
which includes establishments such as various types of restau-
rants, cafes and fast foods outlets. It is the largest sector in the
UK with approximately 70% of all outlets (UK Cabinet Ofce,
2008). In addition to the mainstream restaurants, there are also a
number of unusual restaurants which seek to differ themselves
by offering unique dining experiences. These include suspended
and under-sea restaurants with others composed entirely of ice
(Toxel, 2009).
There is also a tendency to think that this sector is made up pri-
marily of chain outlets; whereas the opposite is true. The prot
sector, worldwide, is comprised primarily of single, mainly own-
er-managed outlets, accounting, in 2010, for three quarters of sales
restaurant, full-service restaurants dominate by sales (Euromonitor
International, 2011) but when considering that average spend in
these establishments is generally higher, there is likely to be a

0950-3293/$ - see front matter 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2012.02.003
224 J.S.A. Edwards / Food Quality and Preference 27 (2013) 223229

Reliable and accurate data on the size of the industry are dif-
cult to obtain but by way of example, the turnover in the US in
Profit Sector Cost Sector 2011 is estimated to be $604billion in 980,000 locations and
Private Sector Public Sector employing almost 13 million employees (NRA, 2011). The avail-
Commercial Sector Welfare/Institutional Sector ability of reliable data, for example, calculating the number of peo-
ple employed, is compounded by the nature of the industry itself.
Despite high levels of unemployment in a many countries, the
Hotels, Guest Houses etc Hospital & Other Healthcare foodservice industry is less attractive due to the nature of the work
Restaurants, Cafs, etc Education/Schools, Universities and working conditions, unsocial working hours, split-shift work-
Fast Food & Franchises Food- Employee Feeding ing and low pay. As a result, many employed within the industry
Take-aways/Take-outs
service are casual, part-time employees, often female, students or immi-
Sectors Prisons etc grants (legal and illegal) who remain off the books and are not
Public houses/Bars etc Armed Forces therefore recorded.
Clubs Public Sector e.g Police & Fire It is also, or has been, a growth industry where spending has
Transport & Travel shown a constant increase. In the UK, spending on food and drink
consumed outside the home overtook that consumed at home in
2003/04 (National Statistics, 2006) and rose 7% between 2006
and 2011 (Mintel, 2011). However despite this size, worldwide,
Fig. 1. One possible classication of sectors in the foodservice industry. Source: the Asia Pacic region very much dominates with around 40% of
Adapted from Edwards and Hartwell (2009). total foodservice spending in 2010. This region also leads in the to-
tal number of outlets, described as absolutely overwhelming,
reecting a staggering number of small, independent restaurants
more equal distribution with full service, fast food outlets, cafes and street stalls in markets like China and India (Euromonitor
and bars having broadly similar sales. International, 2011). Eating out also remains important to social
The second foodservice sector is the cost, public or welfare/ life in the Asia Pacic region accounting in part for China being
institutional sector, which in the UK is much smaller with approx- the number two foodservice market, and also a strong penetration
imately 6% of sales by value but serving approximately a third of all in higher-income markets such as Japan and South Korea, boding
meals consumed outside the home (UK Cabinet Ofce, 2008). The well for countries such as Vietnam and Indonesia. Latin America
importance of this sector is often overlooked, partly as it is consid- continues to grow strongly, led by Brazil, Argentina and Columbia,
ered less glamorous but, as discussed later, it is a sector, which is helped in part by growing consumer spending and their relative
probably more difcult and demanding, and arguably, therefore, nancial stability (Euromonitor International, 2011).
where more research is needed. Notwithstanding recent economic impacts, the foodservice
An alternative classication (Fig. 2) is one where the industry is industry is facing many challenges but one of the primary concerns
classied according to its business rationale: where foodservice is is its role in the current health debate; the rising incidence of over-
either the primary goal of the business; where it is part of the over- weight and obesity, along with the consumption of total, saturated
all experience; an additional offering, used to add-value to the and hydrogenated fats and salt. In many countries, such as the UK,
business; or where it is either essential or desirable, but not the chain operators have committed themselves to help address these
primary business goal. issues (Food Standards Agency, 2010) but the challenge is to

Profit/Commercial Profit/Commercial
The primary business goal Part of the total experience
Restaurants, Cafes, Fast Hotels etc, Cruise Liners,
Food, Take-away etc Theme Parks

Food-
service

Profit/Commercial Cost/Public

An additional offering Essential or desirable but

Railway Stations secondary to the businesss
Bus Stations primary goal
Airports Hospitals & Other Healthcare
Trains Education Schools, Universities
Airplanes Employee Feeding
Ferries Armed Forces
Shops and Stores Public Sector e.g. Police & Fire

Fig. 2. An alternative classication of the foodservice industry. Source: Adapted from Edwards and Hartwell (2009).
 J.S.A. Edwards / Food Quality and Preference 27 (2013) 223229
engage the smaller independents, which form the majority of out-
lets although in the UK efforts are also being made to engage with
this group (Food Standards Agency, 2011).
The fast food industry has already agreed to phase out practices
such as supersizing (Derbyshire, 2004), offering larger portions for
a relatively small increase in price. Several countries have also
started to introduce menu labelling, designed to show the calo-
rie/energy content of meals served, but in many cases, this only ap-
plies to operations with 15 or more outlets (Roberto, Schwartz, &
Brownell, 2009) and as a consequence, does not include the major-
ity of operations. Other suggestions have included a tax on fast
food (a fat-tax, Leicester & Windmeijer 2004) or a tax on zzy
drinks (pop) (a soda tax), the latter being economically viable
(Brownell et al., 2009) and a reality in countries such as Denmark
(BBC News Europe, 2011) and France; although it is not entirely
clear if this is health or austerity driven (Reuters, 2011).
Another area that is always of interest to the foodservice indus-
try is keeping up to date with changing food trends, which cur-
rently centre on what might be termed novelty foods and newer
cuisines. These include molecular gastronomy, fusion cuisine, eth-
nic variations and inuences and the use of organic and/or locally
sourced ingredients. Just as there are many types of commercial
restaurant, so there are types and styles of food, which enable out-
lets to gain a competitive advantage and also provide an opportu-
nity for product developers.
3. More than just a meal
However, the foodservice industry and eating out involve much
more than the opportunity to consume food and meals a refuel-
ling process and the entire meal experience needs to be consid-
ered if it is to be properly understood. This can be seen in a
number of areas and in the public sector, for example, meals have
meanings beyond the food itself. In both prisons and hospitals, the
experience of meals and eating are somewhat different from that
found when eating in a commercial restaurant in that customers
are invariable either reluctant, unwilling and would sooner be else-
where. The food and meals provide relief from the boredom of
everyday routine and are something to look forward to, although
the outcome may disappoint. Mealtimes are imposed, and food is
presented at times, which may not necessarily coincide with when
diners are hungry. Menu choice, if there is one, is often made early,
perhaps several days before the meal is consumed, which may en-
hance prison foodservice but not necessarily for those in hospital.
In the latter case, patients, for a number of reasons, such as being
out of the ward receiving treatment elsewhere in the hospital, may
not be able to order their own food. Similarly, new admissions are
served the food ordered by the patient who vacated the bed. Final-
ly, the market may be regarded as captive, although in many cases
this is often a misnomer, and the foodservice system is or should
be capable of providing the primary source of food and nutrients.
In addition, in prisons the challenges are further complicated as
meal times are an occasion where prisoners come together to col-
lect their meals from the service counter and, therefore, are a time,
opportunity and catalyst for aggression. Food and meals are an
obvious and easy target for complaints, an opportunity to disrupt
the system using tactics such as changing religious or other dietary
demands, and act as a form of currency with which to barter or
bully other inmates.
There is a need to provide prisoners with the opportunity to
consume a healthy, nutritionally balanced diet, for various groups
of individuals, which in UK prisons is done by using a menu with a
choice of ve dishes, plus potatoes, vegetables and pasta and or-
dered up to three days in advance (Edwards, Hartwell, & Schafheitle,
2009). This might initially seem excessive or unnecessary, but
225
from a foodservice perspective it allows for better planning of as-
pects including food purchases, manpower and production and in
so doing avoid overproduction and waste. It also provides prison-
ers with the opportunity to make a choice thereby reducing the
opportunity for complaints and resulting aggressive behaviour
when they do not receive a meal of their choice.
Similarly, in hospitals, patients are anxious and frightened hav-
ing been removed from the security of their own home. They are in
an alien environment, surrounded by strangers and by staff with
superior knowledge. This is accompanied by an associated loss
of privacy, mealtimes, which t in with medical routine, and meals,
which are consumed in an unnatural eating position. Perhaps of
crucial importance and something which is often overlooked, is
that food and meals are part of the treatment (Allison, 1999),
which can aid and speed a patients recovery.
Despite this last aspect, it has been shown that in the UK, 40% of
patients are malnourished when they enter hospital and as many
as 75% loose weight while in hospital (McWhirter & Pennington,
1994). This, of course, depends on how malnutrition is dened
and measured but what is clear is that malnutrition is not conned
to the UK and affects most, if not all, countries (MNI, 2010;
Norman, Pichard, Lochs, & Pirlich, 2008). If food and meals are an
integral part of treatment, patients are not taking their medicine;
but hospital food and menus need not necessarily be boring and
institutional and some hospitals have menus similar to those
found in up-market restaurants offering an extremely high stan-
dard of foodservice (Edwards, 2001).
These issues present a challenge not found in the commercial
sector and, in addition, there is a further compounding factor
termed Institutional Stereotyping by Cardello, Bell, and Kramer
(1996). People hold strong, usually negative and denite views
on institutional meals and meal service, such as those found in
hospitals, schools and the military. When asked what a person
thinks of say hospital food, the responses are invariable negative
whether or not that individual has any recent experience. In a ser-
ies of studies, this was demonstrated by Cardello et al. (1996) who
showed that not only do people hold strong negative attitudes on
the quality and acceptability of institutional food, but also that
these views in turn affect consumers actual ratings of the food.
When looking at the causes, Cardello and colleagues concluded
that contributing factors were poor food variety and presentation;
and poor physical characteristics of the dining room, although
many more could also be identied.
Similarly, eating out in the commercial foodservice sector is
much more than simply matching food to the consumer and there
is a growing body of research to show that the entirety of the sit-
uation needs to be considered and assessed, rather than the sepa-
rate individual components: namely the food, the consumer and
the situation under which consumption takes place. The basic food
quality is an absolute necessity, thereafter the ambience (service-
scapes) and service performance can greatly inuence a customers
evaluation of a particular establishment. Indeed it has been clearly
demonstrated that for highly satised restaurant customers, the
food, in particular taste and appealing presentation; the service,
in particular a willingness to help and knowledgeable employees;
along with atmospherics, in particular spatial seating arrange-
ments, attractive interior design and pleasant music are all impor-
tant (Namkung & Jang, 2008).
Understanding the role and signicance the situation has on
eating was recognised as long ago as 1945 when the acceptability
ratings of food items were shown to be different when consumed
on the ground or on an aircraft ight (Green & Butts, 1945). This
notion was explored and developed in studies conducted in restau-
rants and cafeterias, which have shown that identical food is rated
differently in different dining settings. Meiselman, Johnson, Reeve,
and Crouch (2000) served US army combat rations, the Meal Ready
226 J.S.A. Edwards / Food Quality and Preference 27 (2013) 223229
to Eat, taken out of their packaging and offered as part of the menu,
in both a cafeteria and restaurant. Edwards, Meiselman, Edwards,
and Lesher (2003) took this a stage further and served a standard
dish, Chicken a la King, a creamy chicken dish with rice, in a variety
of locations including a military dining room, residential home and
a 4-star restaurant where the dish could be freely chosen from the
menu. King, Meiselman, Hottenstein, Work, and Cronk (2007), in a
conrmatory study, served similar dishes in a central location lab-
oratory, a central location and outlet of a national restaurant chain.
In all of these studies identical meals were served after which din-
ers rated the acceptability of the meal/dish, using a 9-point hedo-
nic scale. In all cases, the factor which differed was the situation
under which consumption took place but the results clearly
showed a difference in acceptability with a distinct hierarchy;
the better the dining facility, the higher the acceptability ratings.
It could of course be argued that different groups of diners were in-
volved, but the point is that when identical food is served in a dif-
ferent category of dining room, diners rate the dish differently.
Many studies have demonstrated the importance of the situa-
tion or circumstances under which consumption takes place and
how they might be manipulated. The purpose of this part of the pa-
per, therefore, is not to provide a comprehensive literature review,
rather to highlight the extent and breadth of the research under-
taken to illustrate the importance of the situation and how ele-
ments can inuence eating out of the home.
4. Time perspectives
Time, or lack of time, can affect eating out in a number of ways.
Although eating tends to be a patterned activity with humans typ-
ically eating between four and ve meals per day (de Castro, 1988),
more recently, there has been a move away from xed meal times
to a grazing culture with meals being consumed throughout the
day (Mestdag, 2005 [Finland]); Cheng, Olsen, Southerton, & Warde,
2007 [UK]).
4.1. Appropriateness of the food/time
Many foods are considered appropriate for consumption at
certain times of the day. Bread, fruit and non-alcoholic beverages,
for example, may be appropriate at any time of the day or night,
but at other times, some foods are considered more appropriate
than others. Chocolate milk might be appropriate for a light meal
in Finland but not with a proper meal (Lhteenmki & Tuorila,
1997).
When asked to rate the appropriateness and acceptability of
various foods at breakfast and lunch, pre-study, all foods received
signicantly higher scores when rated for the appropriate meal-
time, indicating a clear preference for food-appropriate meal occa-
sions. However, when breakfast and lunch items were served both
for breakfast and lunch there were no clear preferences for foods
served at the appropriate time and no effect on energy intake,
although more energy from both the breakfast and lunch foods
was consumed at the lunch period (Kramer, Rock, & Engell,
1992). Although preferences for various foods can be the same, rat-
ings for appropriateness for various situations can be signicantly
different (Cardello & Schutz, 1996).
4.2. Time available to consume a meal
The amount of time taken to consume meals varies within and
without countries. Adolescents in France, for example, spend more
time at meals (1.9 h per day) compared to a mean of 1.2 h across
the rest of Europe, with a low in Hungary of 0.9 h. In the US, the
time for meals ranged from 0.8 to 1.2 h per day; 1.1 h for US and
Indian 8th graders and Korean 12th graders (Larson & Verma,
1999). The average time for students of all grades to consume
lunch (that is the physical act of eating) was between 7 and
10 min (Conklin, Lambert, & Anderson, 2002). In addition, time
spent at the table socialising and other activities ranged from 3
to 26 min compared with a goal of 20 min total time at the table
(see also Bergman, Buergel, Enamuthu, & Sanchez, 2000).
At work, the term lunch hour is often used but increasingly an
hour for lunch is the exception rather than the rule; the average
length of the midday break in the UK in 2002 was 27 min, some
9 min shorter than 2000 (Eurest, 2002). In 2008, this had risen
slightly to 29 min (Eurest Services, 2008). Even so, 7% continue to
work whilst eating and a quarter of workers are increasingly
replacing meals with snacks on the go and placing greater empha-
sis on speed and convenience rather than choosing what to eat.
Eating on the run has been associated with higher intakes of soft
drinks, fast food, total fat and saturated fat intake but a lower in-
take of more healthy foods such as fruit and vegetables (Larson,
Nelson, Neumark-Sztainer, Story, & Hannan, 2009).
Diners consuming an evening meal in sit-down, casual, upscale
casual and ne dining restaurants rated perceptions of the pace at
which the meal progressed. When the pace was perceived as being
too slow or too fast, they were less satised with the dining
experience. When the pace was too slow, customers perceived
waiters responses as being reduced and in some cases doubted
the waiters skills and levels of knowledge. It also decreased con-
dence in their ability to provide what was considered to be a good
service. On the other hand, when the pace was too fast, customers
were less satised as they perceived themselves as being rushed
leading customers to question the waiters understanding and sen-
sitivity to their needs. The inappropriate pace, too fast or slow, left
customers wondering who was actually in control or in charge of
the meal (Noone & Kimes, 2005).
4.3. Queuing (waiting in line)
Queuing, or waiting in line, is seen as being central to the total
customer experience for two basic reasons: it is often the rst
encounter with the service provider and it is an identiable and
memorable part of the total experience (Dawes & Rowley,
1996). Yet, although queuing has been studied extensively in
retailing, the effects it has on eating out is not well covered, de-
spite the fact that it can be the source of extreme annoyance and
regarded by many as pivotal in satisfaction and quality judge-
ments (Hui, Dube, & Chebat, 1997). Restaurant customers who
are unhappy with the long wait to be seated may complain about
the quality of the food, even if the food is totally acceptable
(Davis & Heineke, 1998).
The effects of making people wait has been demonstrated
(Edwards, 1984) by allowing the rst group of diners arriving at
the entrance to a self-service cafeteria to enter immediately. Sub-
sequent groups were made to wait, with no explanation given as
to the cause, for three, six and nine minutes. Each group proceeded,
as usual, to the service counter and selected, from a choice of eight
main meal components. They then found their own table, were gi-
ven a questionnaire and asked to record what they had selected
and when nished, to rate each food component using a nine-point
hedonic scale. The experiment was stopped as soon as the full
range of meals choices was not available. Results clearly indicate,
with one exception, how the longer individuals are made to wait,
the lower the acceptability ratings of the food.
On the other hand, the speed of service and time spent waiting
in a service line in a cafeteria could be advantageous and can inu-
ence what is chosen. Spending longer in a queue can lead to higher
nutrient values for the meals chosen although it is not entirely
clear why (Lieux & Manning, 1992).
 J.S.A. Edwards / Food Quality and Preference 27 (2013) 223229
4.4. Time since last food intake
The total amount of food consumed is inuenced by a number
of factors and, regardless of the social conditions, can be predicted
by the subjective state of hunger, prior stomach content and the
duration of the interval between meals. Individually, each of these
factors account for only a relatively small variation in the intake,
(7%, 4% and 2%) but collectively, they account for 28% of the varia-
tion. Hence the regulation of food intake occurs by adjusting the
meal size to preprandial factors, such as the length of time since
the last meal and the amount of food remaining in the stomach
(de Castro, 1988). Energy intake can only be mildly affected by in-
take the previous day, but more negatively related to intake on the
subsequent second and third days (de Castro, 1998). Increases in
meal frequency also led to a delay in gastric emptying of a subse-
quent meal but no signicant effects on post-meal appetite
(Jackson et al., 2007).
5. Social surroundings
Eating alone or with others (social facilitation). Eating out is gen-
erally regarded as a social activity but in many instances, although
diners may be surrounded by other people, they actually eat alone,
or at least, not in the company of others; a phenomenon referred to
as social facilitation.
In an early study of adult diners in a variety of formal and fast
food operations (Klesges, Bartsch, Norwood, Kautzman, & Haugrud,
1984), the amount of energy consumed was found to be deter-
mined by three main factors. Gender, where overall, males con-
sumed more than females (835 kcal vs. 716 kcal); the type of
restaurant, where greater amounts were consumed in fast food
restaurants than more formal dining settings (842 kcal vs.
710 kcal); and the company of others, where more food was con-
sumed when eating in groups rather than alone (828 kcal vs.
742 kcal).
Why social facilitation should be so important is far from clear,
but it has been suggested that it could be either conscious or sub-
conscious; the presence of others increasing levels of arousal and
drive, or providing cues as to appropriate or inappropriate behav-
iour (Zajonc, 1965). It could be that when meals are eaten together,
more food is provided, individuals might be hungrier in the pres-
ence of others, the atmosphere might be more sociable, the food
might taste better or simply that the meal might last longer (Bell
& Pliner, 2003; Feunekes, de Graaf, & van Staveren, 1995).
Social facilitation is not conned to single, formal meals, but can
be seen across a complete range of meals. Strong correlations have
been shown between meals consumed during the breakfast, lunch
and dinner periods, when eaten in restaurants, at home and else-
where, consumed with or without alcohol and for snacks on their
own (de Castro, 1990). When meals are consumed in the company
of others and with alcohol, more energy is consumed than without
alcohol, and the meals contain more of each macronutrient, pro-
tein, fat and carbohydrate (de Castro, 1990).
There is a strong correlation between the number of people
present and the total amount consumed (de Castro & Brewer,
1992), but not only is the number of people present important,
so is their relationship to the person consuming the meal. Irrespec-
tive of the time of the day, meals eaten with a spouse and family
are larger and eaten faster, while meals eaten with friends were
larger but of a longer duration. Male companions had a greater im-
pact for females but not for males (de Castro, 1993).
When eating alone, the meal is often lengthened where diners
read books, newspapers or other material. In coffee shops, 79% of
lone individuals read compared with 15% of those in groups.
Groups remained signicantly longer than lone individuals and
227
those reading stayed longer that those not reading although it is
not clear if they actually consumed more (Sommer & Steele, 1997).
Much of the research into social facilitation has been under-
taken in a controlled laboratory setting or by participants main-
taining a food diary but in one small study in a National Health
Service (NHS) hospital (Edwards & Hartwell, 2004), dietary data
were collected for three consecutive 24-h periods from patients
hospitalised for a variety of surgical procedures. Meals, ordered
as usual, were consumed in one of three positions chosen by the
individuals: around a table with others, sitting by their bed or sit-
ting in bed. Results show a signicant increase (p < 0.05) in mean
daily energy intake for the group sitting around the table over
the other two groups.
6. Physical surroundings, atmosphere or ambience
The eating out location contains a multitude of features and
characteristics, ranging from the seating arrangements, lighting,
dcor and odours to the staff and others present. Each of these,
both independently and synergistically, contribute to the overall
atmosphere; variously described as facility based effects, atmo-
spherics, (Kotler, 1973), and servicescapes (Bitner, 1992). The fac-
tors contributing to a nice atmosphere or bad atmosphere are
difcult to determine although Turley and Milliman (2000), in a re-
view of the experimental evidence on shopping behaviour, divided
them into ve categories:
 External variables, such as the entrance, signs and size of the
building.
 General interior variables, such as ooring, music, colour, smell
and temperature.
 Layout and design variables, such as space, waiting areas, furni-
ture layout and trafc ows.
 Point of purchase and decoration variables, such as signs, cards
and product displays.
 Human variables, such as employee and customer characteris-
tics, crowding, and privacy.
6.1. Table layout and seating
The overall restaurant, table and seating layout can be symbolic
and used to indicate status, dene personal space and to regulate
privacy and interaction (Robson, 2002). Fixed or architectural fea-
tures, such as columns, walls, dumb waiters nooks and crannies in
larger restaurants, are used to help dene personal space, provide a
buffer and help prevent or deter others from encroaching on that
space. Whenever possible, people choose seats around the edges of
the room and use items such as bags, shopping and other personal
effects to help dene and protect their territory and dissuade oth-
ers from sitting nearby (Robson, 2002). Cultural differences can
also be seen, where, for example, Swedes tend to sit face to face
when interacting whereas, English prefer to sit at right angles to
each other, although this may vary depending on the relationships
between the individuals concerned. North Americans prefer seats
that are anchored by either a permanent or semi-permanent struc-
ture such as booths, columns or planters; in Chinese restaurants,
high status seats are those in the middle of the restaurant that
can be viewed from several positions in the dining room (Robson,
2002).
Types of tables, seating and their conguration have the ability
to inuence how long people spend in the dining room and how
much they spend (Thompson, 2003). Customers seated in booths,
i.e. anchored seats, spent signicantly more than those seated in
other types of seats; customers seated next to the window have
a lower average spend (Kimes & Robson, 2004). The average dining
228 J.S.A. Edwards / Food Quality and Preference 27 (2013) 223229
duration of customers sitting at anchored seats did not differ sig-
nicantly to those at unanchored seats, although customers seated
at banquettes had a signicantly longer dining duration than those
seated at other types of table.
6.2. Music
Music has been well studied, from the early work of Milliman
(1986), to more recent work, such as, North, Shilcock, and
Hargreaves (2003). Studies of different genres and speed of music
have shown that slower music encourages diners to spend longer
at the table and spend more on their purchases; and music, partic-
ularly classical music is better than no music. It is not suggested
that music or a particular type of music should be played, but
rather to illustrate how a dining situation might be manipulated
and inuenced.
6.3. Odour
An exposure to an odour, which is liked, increases hunger per-
ception and actual consumption. This was demonstrated in a study
where diners were invited to an all-day breakfast, where they
could freely chose their food and return for more if they wanted.
On some days, there was a no smell, some days a pleasant smell
(grilled bacon) and on other days a smell which was disliked
(boiled cabbage).
On days when exposed to a smell, which was liked rather than
no or a disliked smell, consumption rose, the pleasantness of the
smell had a positive inuence on the amount consumed (Blackwell,
1997).
6.4. Dcor
Finally, in a classic study by Bell, Meiselman, Pierson, and Reeve
(1994), an Italian menu was offered in an up-market restaurant
and diners asked to state, amongst other things, which country
they thought the food came from, either Britain, Italy, France or
simply foreign. During the following weeks, the experimental
phase, the same menu was offered but this time the restaurant
was decorated with an Italian theme, including such things as ags
and bunting. In the control phase diners were unsure as to which
country the food came from but when an Italian theme was added,
they immediately recognised that the food was Italian. Nothing
had changed in terms of food, but manipulating the situation had
brought about the change. Interestingly, an inability to differenti-
ate the ethnicity of the food during the control phase illustrates
the internationalisation of food, when eating out of the home.
7. Summary and conclusions
The prevalence of eating out of the home is increasing in an
industry which offers a divers range of outlets, commonly classi-
ed into two sectors: prot, private or commercial; and cost, public
or welfare/institutional sector. The foodservice industry is an inte-
gral and growing component of most economies and therefore of-
fers a vast number of opportunities.
Eating and eating out involves more than simply matching meals
with consumers and the ingestion of food; but a myriad or other fac-
tors, which can affect the eating out experience. It is important,
when examining eating out to consider not only the food or meal
but also the customer and the situation under which consumption
will take place. These need to be considered together, rather than
as Individual components in isolation. Only by doing so can the eat-
ing out experience really be assessed.
This has important implications for aspects such as product
development where, in addition to the basic laboratory and sen-
sory work, testing needs to be moved into a realistic setting where
consumption is to take place. Only then can a true understanding
be gained and the product properly evaluated.
References
Allison, S. P. (1999). Hospital food as treatment. Maidenhead, Berks: British
Association for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.
BBC News Europe. (2011). Denmark introduces worlds rst food fat tax. 1 October
2011. Available from: <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15137948>
Accessed 02.12.2011.
Bell, R., Meiselman, H. L., Pierson, B. J., & Reeve, W. G. (1994). Effects of adding an
Italian theme to a restaurant on the perceived ethnicity, acceptability, and
selection of foods. Appetite, 22(1), 1124.
Bell, R., & Pliner, P. L. (2003). Time to eat: The relationship between the number of
people eating and meal duration in three lunch settings. Appetite, 41, 215218.
Bergman, E., Buergel, N., Enamuthu, J., & Sanchez, A. (2000). Time spent by
schoolchildren to eat lunch. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 100,
696698.
Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on
customers and employees. Journal of Marketing, 56, 5771.
Blackwell, L. R. (1997). The role of olfactory cues and their effects on food choice and
acceptability. PhD Thesis, Bournemouth University.
Brownell, K. D., Farley, T., Willett, W. C., Popkin, B. M., Chaloupka, F. J., & Thompson,
J. W. (2009). The public health and economic benets of taxing sugar-
sweetened beverages. New England Journal of Medicine, 361, 15991605.
Cardello, A. V., Bell, R., & Kramer, M. (1996). Attitudes of consumers toward military
and other institutional foods. Food Quality and Preference, 7(1), 720.
Cardello, A. V., & Schutz, H. G. (1996). Food appropriateness measures as an adjunct
to consumer preference/acceptability evaluation. Food Quality and Preference,
7(3/4), 239249.
Cheng, S.-L., Olsen, W., Southerton, D., & Warde, A. (2007). The changing practice of
eating: Evidence from UK time diaries, 19752000. The British Journal of
Sociology, 58(1), 3961.
Conklin, M. T., Lambert, L. G., & Anderson, J. B. (2002). How long does it take
students to eat lunch? Journal of Child Nutrition and Management, 26(1), 6.
Available from <http://docs.schoolnutrition.org/newsroom/jcnm/02spring/
conklin/> Accessed 08.12.2011.
Davis, M. M., & Heineke, J. (1998). How disconrmation, perception and actual
waiting times impact customer satisfaction. International Journal of Service
Industries Management, 9(1), 6473.
Dawes, J., & Rowley, J. (1996). The waiting experience: Towards service quality in
the leisure industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, 8(1), 1621.
de Castro, J. M. (1988). Physiological, environmental and subjective determinants
on food intake in humans: a meal pattern analysis. Physiology & Behavior, 44(4/
5), 651659.
de Castro, J. M. (1990). Social facilitation of duration and size but not rate of
spontaneous meal intake in humans. Physiology & Behavior, 47(6), 11291135.
de Castro, J. M. (1993). The effects of spontaneous ingestion of particular food or
beverages in the meal patterns and overall nutrient intake of humans.
Physiology & Behavior, 56(6), 11331144.
de Castro, J. M. (1998). Prior days intake has macronutrient-specic delayed
negative feedback effects on the spontaneous food intake of free-living humans.
Journal of Nutrition, 128(1), 6167.
de Castro, J. M., & Brewer, E. M. (1992). The amount eaten in meals by humans is a
power function of the number or people present. Physiology & Behavior, 51(1),
121125.
Derbyshire, D. (2004). McDonalds slim down portions to cut obesity. The Daily
Telegraph. Available from: <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/3336141/
McDonalds-slim-down-portions-to-cut-obesity.html> Accessed 21.09.2011.
Edwards, J. S. A. (1984). The effects of queuing on food preferences. International
Journal of Hospitality Management, 3(2), 8385.
Edwards, J. S. A. (2001). Hospital food service: A USA perspective. Journal of the Royal
Society for the Promotion of Health, 121(4), 209.
Edwards, J. S. A., & Hartwell, H. J. (2004). A comparison of energy intake between
eating positions in a NHS hospital A pilot study. Appetite, 43, 323325.
Edwards, J. S. A., & Hartwell, H. J. (2009). Institutional meals. In Meiselman, H. L.
(Ed), Meals in science and practice. Interdisciplinary research and business
applications (pp. 102127). Oxford: CRC Press, Woodhead Publishing.
Edwards, J. S. A., Hartwell, H. J., & Schafheitle, J. (2009). Prison foodservice in
England. Journal of Foodservice, 20(4), 157166.
Edwards, J. S. A., Meiselman, H. L., Edwards, A., & Lesher, L. (2003). The inuence of
eating location on the acceptability of identically prepared foods. Food Quality &
Preference, 14, 647652.
Edwards, J. S. A., & Overstreet, K. (2009). What is foodservice? Journal of Foodservice,
20, 13.
Eurest. (2002). The Eurest lunchtime report 2002. Compass Group. Denham,
Uxbridge.
Eurest Services. (2008). Eurest services eating out at work report. Denham,
Uxbridge.
 J.S.A. Edwards / Food Quality and Preference 27 (2013) 223229
Euromonitor International. (2009). Global consumer foodservice: Dening value
after the recession. Available from: <https://www.portal.euromonitor.com/
Portal/Handlers/accessPDF.ashx?c=28nPDFn&f=F-157283-18363228.pdf&code=
ieDWhVveClP8L1FtmRMbe8ntzt8%3d> Accessed 14.09.2011.
Euromonitor International. (2011). Consumer foodservice global overview: Finding
growth in a fragmented world. Passport, Global Market Information Database,
15 July 2011. Available from: <https://www.portal.euromonitor.com/Portal/
Pages/Analysis/AnalysisPage.aspx> Accessed 14.09.2011.
Feunekes, G. I. J., de Graaf, C., & van Staveren, W. A. (1995). Social facilitation of food
intake is mediated by meal duration. Physiology & Behavior, 58(3), 551558.
Food Standards Agency. (2010). Healthy catering commitments. Available from:
<http://www.food.gov.uk/scotland/scotnut/healthycatering/cateringbusiness/
commitments> Accessed 19.09.2011.
Food Standards Agency. (2011). Practical tips for caterers. Available from:
<http://www.food.gov.uk/scotland/scotnut/healthycatering/healthycatering2/>
Accessed 19.09.2011.
Green, D. M., & Butts, J. S. (1945). Factors affecting acceptability of meals served in
the air. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 21, 415499.
Hui, M. K., Dube, L., & Chebat, J.-C. (1997). The impact of music on consumers
reaction to waiting for services. Journal of Retailing, 73(1), 87104.
Jackson, S. J., Leahy, F. E., Jebb, S. A., Prentice, A. M., Coward, W. A., & Bluck, L. J. C.
(2007). Feeding frequency delays the gastric emptying of a substantial meal.
Appetite, 48, 199205.
Kimes, S. E., & Robson, S. K. A. (2004). The impact of restaurant table characteristics
on meal duration and spending. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration
Quarterly, November, 45, 333346.
King, S. C., Meiselman, H. L., Hottenstein, A. W., Work, T. M., & Cronk, V. (2007). The
effects of contextual variables on food acceptability; a conrmatory study. Food
Quality and Preference, 18, 5865.
Klesges, R. C., Bartsch, D., Norwood, J. D., Kautzman, D., & Haugrud, S. (1984). The
effects of selected social and environmental variables in the eating behavior of
adults in the natural environment. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 3(4),
3541.
Kotler, P. (1973). Atmospherics as a marketing tool. Journal of Retailing, 49(Winter),
4864.
Kramer, F. M., Rock, K., & Engell, D. (1992). Effects of time of day and
appropriateness on food intake and hedonic ratings at morning and midday.
Appetite, 18(1), 113.
Larson, N. L., Nelson, M. C., Neumark-Sztainer, D., Story, M., & Hannan, P. J. (2009).
Making time for meals: Meal structure and associations with dietary intake in
young adults. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 109(1), 7279.
Larson, R. W., & Verma, S. (1999). How children and adolescents spend time across
the world: Work, play, and developmental opportunities. Psychological Bulletin,
125(6), 701736.
Lhteenmki, L., & Tuorila, H. (1997). Item-by-use appropriateness of drinks varying
in sweetener and fat content. Food Quality and Preference, 8(2), 8590.
Leicester, A. & Windmeijer, F. (2004). The fat tax: Economic incentives to reduce
obesity. The Institute for Fiscal Studies, Brieng Note No. 49. Available from:
<http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn49.pdf> Accessed 21.09.2011.
Lieux, E. M., & Manning, C. K. (1992). Evening meals selected by college students;
impact of the foodservice system. Journal of the American Dietetic Association,
92(5), 560566.
229
Mestdag, I. (2005). Disappearance of the traditional meal: Temporal, social and
spatial destructuration. Appetite, 45, 6274.
McWhirter, J. P., & Pennington, C. R. (1994). Incidence and recognition of
malnutrition in hospitals. British Medical Journal, 308, 945948.
Meiselman, H. L., Johnson, J. L., Reeve, W., & Crouch, J. E. (2000). Demonstrations of
the inuence of the eating environment on food acceptance. Appetite, 35,
231237.
Milliman, R. E. (1986). The inuence of background music on the behavior of
restaurant patrons. Journal of Consumer Research, 13, 286289.
Mintel. (2011). Eating out review UK, July 2011. Mintel, London.
MNI. (2010). Tackling malnutrition: Oral nutritional supplements as an integrated
part of patient and disease management in hospital and in the community. A
summary of the evidence. Medical Nutrition International Industry. Available
from: <http://www.medicalnutritionindustry.com/uploads/content/News%20items/
2010DecONSDossier.pdf> Accessed 19.09.2011.
Namkung, Y., & Jang, S. (2008). Are highly satised restaurant customers really
different? A quality perception perspective. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 20(2), 142155.
National Statistics. (2006). Spending on eating out overtakes meals at home. National
Statistics. Available from: <http://www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/ioa0806.pdf>
Accessed 21.09.2011.
Noone, B. M., & Kimes, S. E. (2005). Dining duration and customer satisfaction. The
Center for Hospitality Research. Cornell University School of Hotel and
Restaurant Administration. CHR Reports, 5(9), 121.
Norman, K., Pichard, C., Lochs, H., & Pirlich, M. (2008). Prognostic impact of disease-
related malnutrition. Clinical Nutrition, 27, 515.
North, A. C., Shilcock, A., & Hargreaves, D. J. (2003). The effect of musical style on
restaurant customers spending. Environment and Behavior, 35(5), 712718.
NRA. (2011). Facts at a glance. 2011 restaurant industry overview. Available from:
<http://www.restaurant.org/research/facts/> Accessed 14.09.2011.
Reuters. (2011). Cola against French soft drinks tax. Available from: <http://
www.guardian.co.uk/business/feedarticle/9836088> Accessed 19.09.2011.
Roberto, C. A., Schwartz, M. B., & Brownell, K. D. (2009). Rationale and evidence for
menu-labeling legislation. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 37(6),
546551.
Robson, S. K. A. (2002). A review of psychology and cultural effects on seating
behaviour and application to food service settings. Journal of Foodservice
Business Research, 59(2), 89107.
Sommer, R., & Steele, J. (1997). Social effects on duration in restaurants. Appetite,
29(1), 2530.
Thompson, G. M. (2003). Optimizing restaurant-table congurations: Specifying
combinable tables. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly,
February, 44, 5360.
Toxel. (2009). 10 unusual and creative restaurants. Available from: <http://
www.microsofttranslator.com/BV.aspx?ref=IE8Activity&a=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.
toxel.com%2Finspiration%2F2009%2F06%2F20%2F10-unusual-and-creative-
restaurants%2F> Accessed 14.09.2011.
Turley, L. W., & Milliman, R. E. (2000). Atmospheric effects on shopping behavior: A
review of the experimental evidence. Journal of Business Research, 49, 193211.
UK Cabinet Ofce. (2008). Food matters. Towards a strategy for the 21st century.
London: The Strategy Unit.
Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149(3681), 269274.