• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Credits
 Table of Contents
 Introduction
 Extent of use of citrus products...
 Nature of the preferred produc...
 Manner and occasion of serving...
 Relationship between consumer characteristics...
 Substitution among citrus and between...
 Attitude toward, knowledge of,...
 Notes on the use of minor citrus...
 Summary
 Bibliography














Group Title: Bulletin - University of Florida Agricultural Experiment Station ; 509
Title: Use of citrus products in Meridian, Mississippi, households, spring of 1951
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00027656/00001
 Material Information
Title: Use of citrus products in Meridian, Mississippi, households, spring of 1951
Series Title: Bulletin - University of Florida Agricultural Experiment Station ; 509
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Creator: Kimmel, D. C.
Publisher: University of Florida Agricultural Experiment Station
Publication Date: 1952
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00027656
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Page 1
    Credits
        Page 2
        Page 3
    Table of Contents
        Page 4
    Introduction
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
    Extent of use of citrus products in general
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
    Nature of the preferred product
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
    Manner and occasion of serving citrus products
        Page 26
        Page 27
    Relationship between consumer characteristics and variations in consumption of selected citrus products
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
    Substitution among citrus and between citrus and non-citrus products
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
    Attitude toward, knowledge of, and sources of information about citrus products
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
    Notes on the use of minor citrus products
        Page 51
    Summary
        Page 52
    Bibliography
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
Full Text



December 1952


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS
WILLARD M. FIFIELD, Director
GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA








Use of Citrus Products in Meridian,


Mississippi, Households, Spring

D. C. KIMMEL


0 10 20 30 40
Percent


of 1951


6b 70 o0 90


Fig. 1.-Proportions of homemakers reporting use of the various forms
of citrus products, 660 Meridian, Mississippi, households, year prior to
interview, March-April 1951.










Single copies free to Florida residents on request to
AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION
GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA


Fresh
Canned
Frozen
Orangeade
Sections
Hot-pack


Bulletin 509








BOARD OF CONTROL

Frank M. Harris, Chairman, St. Petersburg
Hollis Rinehart, Miami
Eli H. Fink, Jacksonville
George J. White, Sr., Mount Dora
Mrs. Alfred I. duPont, Jacksonville
George W. English, Jr., Ft. Lauderdale
W. Glenn Miller, Monticello
W. F. Powers, Secretary, Tallahassee

EXECUTIVE STAFF
J. Hillis Miller, Ph.D., President
J. Wayne Reitz, Ph.D., Provost for Agr.'
Willard M. Fifield, M.S., Director
J. R. Beckenbach, Ph.D., Asso. Director
L. O. Gratz, Ph.D., Assistant Director
Rogers L. Bartley, B.S., Admin. Mgr.8
Geo. R. Freeman, B.S., Farm Superintendent

MAIN STATION, GAINESVILLE

AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
H. G. Hamilton, Ph.D., Agr. Economist s
R. E. L. Greene, Ph.D., Agr. Economist
M. A. Brooker, Ph.D., Agr. Economist 8
Zach Savage, M.S.A., Associate
A. H. Spurlock, M.S.A., Associate
D. E. Alleger, M.S., Associate
D. L. Brooke, M.S.A., Associate
M. R. Godwin, Ph.D., Associate3
W. K. McPherson, M.S., Economist :
Eric Thor, M.S., Asso. Agr. Economist :
J. L. Tennant, Ph.D., Agr. Economist
Cecil N. Smith, M.A., Asso. Agr. Economist
Levi A. Powell, Sr., M.S.A., Assistant
Orlando, Florida (Cooperative USDA)
G. Norman Rose, B.S., Asso. Agri. Economist
J. C. Townsend, Jr., B.S.A., Agricultural
Statistician
J. B. Owens, B.S.A., Agr. Statistician 2
J. K. Lankford, B.S., Agr. Statistician

AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING
Frazier Rogers, M.S.A., Agr. Engineer 1 '
J. M. Myers, B.S., Asso. Agr. Engineer
J. S. Norton, M.S., Asst. Agr. Eng.

AGRONOMY
Fred H. Hull, Ph.D., Agronomist 12
G. B. Killinger, Ph.D., Agronomist
H. C. Harris, Ph.D., Agronomist
R. W. Bledsoe, Ph.D., Agronomist
W. A. Carver, Ph.D., Associate
Darrel D. Morey, Ph.D., Associate 2
Fred A. Clark, M.S., Assistant2
Myron G. Grennell, B.S.A.E., Assistant
E. S. Horner, Ph.D., Assistant
A. T. Wallace, Ph.D., Assistant
D. E. McCloud, Ph.D., Assistant
G. C. Nutter, Ph.D., Asst. Agronomist

ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND NUTRITION
T. J. Cunha, Ph.D., An. Husbh.1
G. K. Davis, Ph.D., Animal Nutritionist
S. John Folks, Jr., M.S.A., Asst. An. Hush. 3
A. M. Pearson, Ph.D., Asso. An. Husb.3
John P. Feaster, Ph.D., Asst. An. Nutri.
P. D. Wallace, Ph.D., Asst. An. Husb. 8
M. Koger, Ph.D., An. Husbandman 3
E. F. Johnston, M.S., Asst. An. Hush. -
J. F. Hentges, Jr., Ph.D., Asst. An. Hush. .
L. R. Arrington, Ph.D., Asst. Biochemist

DAIRY SCIENCE
E. L. Fouts, Ph.D., Dairy Tech.1
R. B. Becker, Ph.D., Dairy Husb.3
S. P. Marshall, Ph.D., Asso. Dairy Husb.3
W. A. Krienke, M.S., Asso. Dairy Tech.8
P. T. Dix Arnold, M.S.A., Asst. Dairy Husb. '
Leon Mull, Ph.D., Asso. Dairy Tech. 3
H. H. Wilkowske, Ph.D., Asst. Dairy Tech. :
James M. Wing, M.S., Asst. Dairy Hushb.


EDITORIAL
J. Francis Cooper, M.S.A., Editor
Clyde Beale, A.B.J., Associate Editor3
L. Odell Griffith, B.A.J., Asst. Editor a
J. N. Joiner, B.S.A., Assistant Editor 8
William G. Mitchell, A.B.J., Assistant Editor

ENTOMOLOGY
A. N. Tissot, Ph.D., Entomologist
L. C. Kuitert, Ph.D., Associate
H. E. Bratley, M.S.A., Assistant
F. A. Robinson, M.S., Asst. Apiculturist
R. E. Waites, Ph.D., Asst. Entomologist

HOME ECONOMICS
Ouida D. Abbott, Ph.D., Home Econ.'
R. B. French, Ph.D., Biochemist

HORTICULTURE
G. H. Blackmon, M.S.A., Horticulturist '
F. S. Jamison, Ph.D., Horticulturist 3 '
Albert P. Lorz, Ph.D., Horticulturist
R. K. Showalter, M.S., Asso. Hort.
R. A. Dennison, Ph.D., Asso. Hort.
R. H. Sharpe, M.S., Asso. Horticulturist
V. F. Nettles, Ph.D., Asso. Horticulturist
F. S. Lagasse, Ph.D., Horticulturist 2
R. D. Dickey, M.S.A., Asso. Hort.
L. H. Halsey, M.S.A., Asst. Hort.
C. B. Hall, Ph.D., Asst. Horticulturist
Austin Griffiths, Jr., B.S., Asst. Hort.
S. E. McFadden, Jr., Ph.D., Asst. Hort.
C. H. VanMiddelem, Ph.D., Asst. Biochemist
Buford D. Thompson, M.S.A., Asst. Hort.
James Montelaro, Ph.D., Asst. Horticulturist
M. W. Hoover, M.S.A., Asst. Hort.

LIBRARY
Ida Keeling Cresap, Librarian

PLANT PATHOLOGY
W. B. Tisdale, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist'
Phares Decker, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist
Erdman West, M.S., Mycologist and
Botanist 3
Robert W. Earhart, Ph.D., Plant Path.2
Howard N. Miller, Ph.D., Asso. Plant Path.
Lillian E. Arnold, M.S., Asst. Botanist
C. W. Anderson, Ph.D., Asst. Plant Path.

POULTRY HUSBANDRY
N. R. Mehrhof, M.Agr., Poultry Hush.' a
J. C. Driggers, Ph.D.. Asso. Poultry Hush.

SOILS
F. B. Smith, Ph.D., Microbiologist "
Gaylord M. Volk, Ph.D., Soils Chemist
J. R. Neller, Ph.D., Soils Chemist
Nathan Gammon, Jr., Ph.D., Soils Chemist
Ralph G. Leighty, B.S., Asst. Soil Surveyor 2
G. D. Thornton, Ph.D., Asso. Microbiologist
Charles F. Eno, Ph.D., Asst. Soils Micro-
biologist
H. W. Winsor, B.S.A., Assistant Chemist
R. E. Caldwell, M.S.A., Asst. Chemists *
V. W. Carlisle, B.S., Asst. Soil Surveyor
J. H. Walker, M.S.A., Asst. Soil Surveyor
S. N. Edson, M. S., Asst. Soil Surveyor
William K. Robertson, Ph.D., Asst. Chemist
0. E. Cruz, B.S.A., Asst. Soil Surveyor
W. G. Blue, Ph.D., Asst. Biochemist
J. G. A. Fiskel, Ph.D., Asst. Biochemist 3
L. C. Hammond, Ph.D., Asst. Soil Physicist
H. L. Breland, Ph.D., Asst. Soils Chem.

VETERINARY SCIENCE
D. A. Sanders, D.V.M., Veterinarian 1 :
M. W. Emmel, D.V.M., Veterinarian 3
C. F. Simpson, D.V.M., Asso. Veterinarian
L. E. Swanson, D.V.M., Parasitologist
Glenn Van Ness, D.V.M., Asso. Poultry
Pathologist "
W. R. Dennis, D.V.M., Asst. Parasitologist
E. W. Swarthout, D.V.M., Asso. Poultry
Pathologist (Dade City)









BRANCH STATIONS

NORTH FLORIDA STATION, QUINCY

W. C. Rhoades, Jr., M.S., Entomologist in
Charge
R. R. Kincaid, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist
L. G. Thompson, Jr., Ph.D., Soils Chemist
W. H. Chapman, M.S., Asso. Agronomist
Frank S. Baker, Jr., B.S., Asst. An. Husb.
T. E. Webb, B.S.A., Asst. Agronomist
Frank E. Guthrie, Ph.D., Asst. Entomologist
Mobile Unit, Monticello
R. W. Wallace, B.S., Associate Agronomist
Mobile Unit, Marianna
R. W. Lipscomb, M.S., Associate Agronomist
Mobile Unit, Pensacola
R. L. Smith, M.S., Associate Agronomist
Mobile Unit, Chipley
J. B. White, B.S.A., Associate Agronomist

CITRUS STATION, LAKE ALFRED
A. F. Camp, Ph.D., Vice-Director in Charge
W. L. Thompson, B.S., Entomologist
R. F. Suit, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist
E. P. Ducharme, Ph.D., Asso. Plant Path.
C. R. Stearns, Jr., B.S.A., Asso. Chemist
J. W. Sites, Ph.D., Horticulturist
H. O. Sterling, B.S., Asst. Horticulturist
H. J. Reitz, Ph.D., Horticulturist
Francine Fisher, M.S., Asst. Plant Path.
I. W. Wander, Ph.D., Soils Chemist
J. W. Kesterson, MS., Asso. Chemist
R. Hendrickson, B.S., Asst. Chemist
Ivan Stewart, Ph.D., Asst. Biochemist
D. S. Prosser, Jr., B.S., Asst. Horticulturist
R. W. Olsen, B.S., Biochemist
F. W. Wenzel, Jr., Ph.D., Chemist
Alvin H. Rouse, M.S., Asso. Chemist
H. W. Ford, Ph.D., Asst. Horticulturist
L. C. Knorr, Ph.D., Asso. Histologist
R. M. Pratt, Ph.D., Asso. Ent.-Pathologist
J. W. Davis, B.S.A., Asst. in Ent.-Path.
W. A. Simanton, Ph.D., Entomologist
E. J. Deszyck, Ph.D., Asso. Horticulturist
C. D. Leonard, Ph.D., Asso. Horticulturist
W. T. Long, M.S., Asst. Horticulturist
M. H. Muma, Ph.D., Asso. Entomologist
F. J. Reynolds, Ph.D., Asso. Hort.
W. F. Spencer, Ph.D., Asst. Chem.
I. IH Holtaberg, B.S.A., Asst. Ento.-Path.
K. G. Townsend, B.S.A., Asst. Ento.-Path.
J. B. Weeks, B.S., Asst. Ento.-Path.
R. B. Johnson, M.S., Asst. Entomologist
W. F. Newhall, Ph.D., Asst. Biochem.
W. F. Grierson-Jackson-Jc, Ph.D., Asst. Chem.
Roger Patrick, Ph.D., Bacteriologist
Marion F. Oberbachebar, Ph.D., Asst. Plant
Physiologist
Evert J. Elvin, B.S., Asst. Horticulturist

EVERGLADES STATION, BELLE GLADE
W. T. Forsee, Jr., Ph.D.. Chemist in Charge
R. V. Allison, Ph.D., Fiber Technologist
Thomas Bregger, Ph.D., Physiologist
J. W. Randolph, M.S., Agricultural Engr.
R. W. Kidder, M.S., Asso. Animal Husb.
C. C. Seale, Associate Agronomist
N. C. Hayslip, B.S.A., Asso. Entomologist
E. A. Wolf, M.S., Asst. Horticulturist
W. H. Thames, M.S., Asst. Entomologist
W. N. Stoner, Ph.D., Asst. Plant Path.
W. G. Genung, B.S.A., Asst. Entomologist
Frank V, Stevenson, M.S., Asso. Plant Path.
Robert J,. Allen, Ph.D., Asst. Agronomist
V. E. Green, Ph.D., Asst. Agronomist
J. F. Darby, Ph.D., Asst. Plant Path.
H. L. Chapman, Jr., M.S.A., Asst. An. Hush.
V. L. Gunman, Ph.D., Asst. Hort.
M. R. Bedsole, M.S.A., Asst. Chem.
J. C. Stephens, B.S., Drainage Engineer
A. E. Kretschmer, Jr., Ph.D., Asst. Soils
Chem.


SUB-TROPICAL STATION, HOMESTEAD
Geo. D. Ruehle, Ph.D., Vice-Dir. in Oharge
D. 0. Wolfenbarger, Ph.D., Entomologist
Francis B. Lincoln, Ph.D., Horticulturist
Robert A. Conover, Ph.D., Plant Path.
John L. Malcolm, Ph.D., Asso. Soils Chemist
R. W. Harkness, Ph.D., Asst. Chemist
R. Bruce Ledin, Ph.D., Asst. Hort.
J. C. Noonan, M.S., Asst. Hort.
M. H. Gallatin, B.S.. Soil Conservationist '

WEST CENTRAL FLORIDA STATION,
BROOKSVILLE
Marian W. Hazen, M.S., Animal Husband-
man in Charge 2

RANGE CATTLE STATION, ONA
W. G. Kirk, Ph.D., Vice-Director in Charge
E. M. Hodges, Ph.D., Agronomist
D. W. Jones, M.S., Asst. Soil Technologist

CENTRAL FLORIDA STATION, SANFORD
R. W. Ruprecht, Ph.D., Vice-Dir. in Charge
J. W. Wilson, Sc.D., Entomologist
P. J. Westgate, Ph.D., Asso. Hort.
Ben. F. Whitner, Jr., B.S.A., Asst. Hort.
Geo. Swank, Jr., Ph.D., Asst. Plant Path.

WEST FLORIDA STATION, JAY
C. E. Hutton, Ph.D., Vice-Director in Charge
H. W. Lundy, B.S.A., Associate Agronomist
W. R. Langford, Ph.D., Asst. Agronomist

SUWANNEE VALLEY STATION,
LIVE OAK
G. E. Ritchey, M.S., Agronomist in Charge

GULF COAST STATION, BRADENTON
E. L. Spencer, Ph.D., Soils Chemist in Charge
E. G. Kelsheimer, Ph.D., Entomologist
David G. A. Kelbert, Asso. Horticulturist
Robert 0. Magie, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist
J. M. Walter, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist
Donald S. Burgis, M.S.A., Asst. Hort.
C. M. Geraldson, Ph.D., Asst. Horticulturist
Amegda Jack, M.S., Asst. Soils Chemist


FIELD LABORATORIES

Watermelon, Grape, Pasture-Leesturg
J. M. CralI, Ph.I., Associate Plant Path-
ologist Acting in Charge
C. C. Helms, Jr., B.S., Asst. Agronomist
L. H. Stover, Assistant in Horticulture

Strawberry-Plant City
A. N. Brooks, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist

Vegetables-Hastings
A. H. Eddins, Ph.D., Plant Path. in Charge
E. N. McCubbin, Ph.D., Horticulturist
T. M. Dobrovsky, Ph.D., Asst. Entomologist

Pecans-Monticello
A. M. Phillips, B.S., Asso. Entomologist2
John R. Large, M.S., Asso. Plant Path.

Frost Forecasting-Lakeland
Warren O. Johnson, B.S., Meterologist in
Chg.

1 Head of Department
2 In cooperation with U. S.
3 Cooperative, other divisions, U. of F.
On leave









CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION .. ................... ... ..... ....... 5
Objectives ................ ...... ....... ............... 7
M ethods .. .................. .. .. .. ............ 7
T he sam ple -......-.... ... ...-...... ...... ...... ............- -. ........-............- 7
Time of study and availability and price of citrus products ............ 10
Procedure in presentation of findings ........... ....................... 12
EXTENT OF USE OF CITRUS PRODUCTS IN GENERAL .................................... 12
Forms of citrus products served ..............................-.. .....- 12
Individual citrus products served ............................ .. ....... ....... 13
Seasonal variation in the use of citrus products ....--. ........-- ......... 14
THE NATURE OF THE PREFERRED PRODUCT ......---......-...-............... 16
Fresh oranges ............-...........------......... -- .. .... -.. ........ 17
Fresh grapefruit ................ ........-.... .. ....- ...- ..- .......... .. 19
Processed citrus fruits ...-............... ...........-...- ..-- .............. 22
MANNER AND OCCASION OF SERVING CITRUS PRODUCTS ............................. 26
Forms in which fresh fruits were served ....................... ... ............ 26
Occasion of serving citrus products .......................... -............. ... 27
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CONSUMER CHARACTERISTICS AND VARIATIONS
IN CONSUMPTION OF SELECTED CITRUS PRODUCTS ............................. 28
R ace ............... .......... ............ .... .. .... ...... ....... 30
Family income e ................................. ... ............. .... 30
Education of homemaker .......... ..... ... .. ............. 32
A ge of hom em aker ............. -........... .. -..---------- ...-- ........ 35
Family composition ....- ....... ........... ..... -..... ............- 35
SUBSTITUTION AMONG CITRUS, AND BETWEEN CITRUS AND NON-CITRUS,
P RODUCTS ........... ... ..... ... ...... ..... .-. .. -.- ..--- ..-- .. .... ..-... ........ 36
Fresh non-citrus fruits substituted for fresh citrus fruits ................ 37
Non-citrus juices substituted for citrus juices ....................-.............. 40
Products substituted for fresh oranges ............ ... ......... ......- .... 40
Products substituted for canned orange juice .........-................-..... 43
Products substituted for frozen orange concentrate ........................ 44
Products substituted for orangeade ..-......--.. ..-... ---. ...... ...- ........- 45
Substitution between orange products in general ............................ 45
Products substituted for fresh grapefruit .-........... --.... .............. 47
Products substituted for canned grapefruit juice ..........-...................... 47
General Comments on Substitution ......... .... ........ ... ................. 48
ATTITUDE TOWARD, KNOWLEDGE OF, AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION ABOUT
CITRUS PRODUCTS ......................... .. --................... ..... 48
NOTES ON THE USE OF MINOR CITRUS PRODUCTS ...............----..........---....... 51
SUMMARY .........-- --.......------ .......-- ...-.---. --... -------- 52









Use of Citrus Products in Meridian,

Mississippi, Households, Spring of 1951
D. C. KIMMEL 1

INTRODUCTION

One of the major problems confronting the citrus industry is
the disposition of a continuously increasing production. Solu-
tion of this problem involves the coordinated action of growers
and marketing agencies. The purpose of this study is to provide
information which can be used by the various industry groups
to expand the total market for citrus products so as to promote
the interests of both producers and consumers.
Usefulness of the information presented is based on the as-
sumption that market expansion can be promoted by adapting
production to the consumers' wants, by effective advertising and
merchandising, and by bringing the desired product to the con-
sumer at lowest possible cost. This information is essentially
concerned with demand. Any reduction in c)st to the consumer
made possible by this information will come from more efficient
advertising, merchandising, and distribution-not from increased
efficiency in physical handling.
Any adaptation of growing and processing practices to con-
sumers' wants requires a knowledge of those wants. Growers
and processors must know the preferred forms of citrus pro-
ducts, such as canned or fresh; the preferred individual pro-
ducts, such as grapefruit juice or fresh grapefruit; and finally,
the particular kind of individual product, such as sweetened or
unsweetened grapefruit juice, or grapefruit with or without

Acknowledgments-The research on which this report is based was
partially financed by funds provided by the Agricultural Research and
Marketing Act of 1946. Appreciation is expressed to those individuals and
groups in Meridian who contributed to the conduct of the study-the
enumerators, the homemakers, and the Chamber of Commerce. Valuable
assistance in supervising the field work was rendered by Mr. Doyle Abbott,
Field Assistant. Credit for design of the sample is due Mr. W. F. Callander
of the Statistical Laboratory. For over-all supervision and assistance, the
writer is indebted to Dean C. V. Noble, Dr. H. G. Hamilton and adminis-
trative officials of the Florida Agricultural Experiment Station. To the
many other individuals who contributed to the study, the writer expresses
appreciation.
1Formerly Assistant Marketing Economist, Florida Agricultural .Ex-
periment Station.






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


seeds. By satisfying consumer preferences, growers and pro-
cessors may expect to increase total sales.
Adapting production to consumer preferences, alone, is not
likely to bring about the required market expansion. Advertising
and merchandising programs are used to promote the sale of
citrus products. These programs need to be made more effec-
tive.
More effective advertising might be achieved through a knowl-
edge of the current use of citrus products with respect to such
factors as time of year and occasion of use, substitution among
citrus, and between citrus and non-citrus products, and consumer
characteristics associated with use or non-use, or varying levels
of consumption, of citrus products. With such information
available, advertisers can make advertising more effective by
concentrating on the less well-known products; by directing
advertising toward homemakers who seem to make up the largest
potential market; by using better timing to meet competition
from non-citrus; and by avoiding competition among citrus pro-
ducts.
Much of the same information useful to advertisers, such as
substitution and seasonal variation in consumption, should be
useful to retail store operators in developing more effective
merchandising programs. Another type of information is es-
pecially useful to retail store operators. This concerns store
conditions that influence the homemakers' decisions on the kind
of product purchased. Timing and adapting citrus merchandis-
ing programs to meet the competition from non-citrus products-
timing which takes into account the consumers' own seasonal
pattern of use of citrus products-might make these programs
more successful.
A third possible means of market expansion is through lower
prices to consumers. Reduced marketing costs can mean lower
prices to consumers. By marketing the kind of product the
consumer wants, selling costs are reduced. More effective ad-
vertising and merchandising mean increased dollar sales for each
dollar of expenditure; this makes possible further reduction in
price to the consumer. Another way of reducing marketing costs
is by promoting more efficient geographical and seasonal distri-
bution of citrus products. Marketing organizations can more
often have the desired product at the right place at the right
time if they have information on characteristics of homemakers
who use selected citrus products, and on where they live. In-






Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


formation on seasonal variation in the use of these products
would also be helpful. Reduced consumer prices might make
possible an expanded market through making it possible for
more people to buy citrus, and through improving the competi-
tive position of citrus relative to non-citrus products.

OBJECTIVES
The major objectives of the study were:
1. To determine the extent of use of citrus products at a
given time, and the seasonal variation in use.
2. To determine the preferred types of citrus products.
3. To determine the manner and occasion of serving citrus
products.
4. To determine the association between use of citrus pro-
ducts and selected consumer characteristics.
5. To determine what citrus products are substituted for each
other, and what non-citrus products are substituted for citrus
products.
6. To determine the attitude toward, and knowledge and
sources of information about, the use of citrus products.

METHODS
The personal interview technique was used to collect data
from 660 Meridian, Mississippi, homemakers in the spring of
1951. A schedule requiring approximately one hour to com-
plete was designed and pretested. Interviewing was done by a
group of white and colored enumerators who resided in the city
of Meridian. All enumerators were homemakers and had at
least high school educations. Most of them had prior interview-
ing experience, but all were given instruction on the use of the
schedule and the objectives of the study.
The Sample.-There were two phases to the sampling prob-
lem-the selection of the city and the selection of the house-
holds within the city. Selection of the city was a judgment
matter. Selection of the households was accomplished by proba-
bility sampling.
A number of considerations entered into the selection of the
city. Prior studies 2 have indicated a regional variation in con-
sumption of citrus products. Because of the feeling that the
Southern market was perhaps the most neglected and least well-
2 Family Food Consumption in Four Cities, Winter, 1948, 1948 Food Con-
sumption Surveys, Preliminary Report No. 7, USDA, ARA, BHNE, Septem-
ber, 1949.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


known, it was decided that the study should be conducted in a
Southern state. Since there are many medium-to-small sized
cities in the South, it was further decided that the city chosen
should be in the 25,000-to-50,000 population class.
A study of population and industrial characteristics of seven
Southern states 3 revealed about a 65-35 percentage distribution
of white and colored population and a variety of industries, but
occasionally only one industry per city. It was felt that the city
selected should have a variety of industries and should approxi-
mate the 65-35 ratio of white to colored population. Another
important consideration was that the city selected should be far
enough from Florida to have citrus fruits from other producing
areas in competition with Florida.
Meridian, Mississippi, was selected as satisfactorily meeting
the criteria established. Preliminary tabulations from the 1950
Census indicated a total population of 41,790, of which 35 per-
cent was colored. The city is a trade, transportation and manu-
facturing center. Industrial and commercial enterprises include
railroad shops, textile mills, asbestos plants, box factories, ferti-
lizer plants, slaughter houses, lumber manufacturing concerns,
and a variety of trade and service establishments. Data obtained
in a city of such diversified pursuits should be useful in provid-
ing an indication of what might be expected in other Southern
cities.
A combination stratified-random sampling procedure was em-
ployed in selecting 698 households for study.4 Six major strata
and a number of sub-strata were delineated on the basis of race
and estimated relative family income. The number of households
in each stratum was counted and expressed as a proportion of
the total number of households in the city. Within each stratum,
sample blocks of approximately equal size were obtained. This
was done by combining exceptionally small blocks, or dividing
extra large blocks into pseudo blocks.
Tippet's random numbers were employed to select sample

SIn the selection of a city for study, the South was defined to include
the states of Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina,
South Carolina and Tennessee.
*The sample was designed by the Statistical Laboratory of the Univer-
sity of Florida under the direction of W. F. Callander.
STippett's Random Numbers comprise 41,600 digits taken from a British
census report, 0 to 9, randomly assorted, approximately half of them even
and half odd, combined into fours to make 10,400 four-figure numbers.
Probability of any one of the digits occurring at a randomly selected point
in the table is one-tenth.







Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


blocks within each stratum and to select households within each
block. The number of sample blocks selected from each stratum
was proportionate to the importance of that stratum in terms of

Percent
3<

20- Colored


10 'Tota-
... .......White
01' -


0- 20- 30- 40- 50-
19 29 39 49 59
Family income in


60-
79
dollars


80- 100-
99 124
per week


125- 150 or
149 more


0- 20- 30- 40- 50- 60- 70- 80- 90 or
19 29 39 49 59 69 79 89 more
Age of homemaker

Fig. 2.-Percentage distribution of white, colored and total households
by selected consumer characteristics, 660 households, Meridian, Mississippi,
March-April 1951. (Not all of the 660 households are accounted for, aince
complete data on family characteristics were not obtained for all house-
holds.)






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


number of households in the total population of households.
Three households were selected for contact in each sample block.
Enumerators were successful in contacting 677 6 of the 698
households included in the sample. Eleven of the homemakers
contacted refused to give any, or gave only part, of the informa-
tion requested. An additional six unusable records were ob-
tained. Thirty-four homemakers did not use any kind of citrus
products. The only information obtained from them was that
on family characteristics. The bulk of the information in the
report is based on the 626 households-413 white and 213 col-
ored-in which some kind of citrus product was used during the
year prior to the interview. Some of the observations, notably
the proportion of users of the various products, are based on 660
records-the 626 users plus the 34 non-users of citrus products.
The sample population is described in terms of selected family
characteristics in Figure 2. This partially indicates the nature
of the population on which this study is based. It also provides
a basis for assessing the possible applicability of the findings to
other cities.
Time of Study and Availability and Price of Citrus Products.-
Interviewing was conducted during the period March 16 to April
19, 1951. Information was obtained for one, or both, of two
time periods-the seven days or 12 months preceding the day of
interview. Observations made in retail stores 7 just prior to
and just after the period of interviewing indicate this was a
time of change in the kinds of fresh citrus fruits available. Only
Florida oranges were available, and the shift from mid-season
varieties to Valencias was occurring. Temple oranges were dis-
appearing from the market. Pink Texas grapefruit were being
replaced by Florida pink fruit. Florida white grapefruit were
available throughout the period.
Responses to certain questions possibly were influenced by
the level of prices prevailing at the time of interview. To pro-
vide some indication of the price situation at the time interview-
ing was conducted, prices of citrus and possible competing pro-
ducts in early March and early May in two of the largest stores

S677 of the designated or substitute households; 26 substitute records
are included. Call-backs were made; and substitute records were obtained
only in case of vacant or unlocated houses or extended absence of the
occupants.
SObservations on condition of availability and price are taken from
data collected in another phase of this study which involved work in retail
stores.








TABLE 1.-PRICES OF SELECTED CITRUS AND POSSIBLE COMPETING PRODUCTS, Two LARGE RETAIL GROCERY STORES, MERIDIAN,
MISSISSIPPI, EARLY MARCH AND EARLY MAY 1951.


Product


Fresh fruit:
Oranges ..... ..
Pink grapefruit .

White grapefruit
Delicious apples


March


Store A
unit


5 lbs.
1 lb. (64's)

12 fruit (64's)
2 lbs.


Store B


price unit

.37 5 lbs.
.12 1 lb.


.13 2 lbs.
S .25 1 lb.


price


Store A
unit Ipric
I


.35 1 doz. (200's)
.09 1 fruit
(54's, 64's)
.11 2 fruit (70's)
.13 1 lb.
I


.34


May

e I

5 lbs.


.12-.15 1 lb.
.15 2 lbs.
.113 1 lb.


Juices:
Orange juice
46 oz ........ .. .......
18 oz .......
Grapefruit juice
46 oz ....... .......
18 oz. ........... -. ...... ..
Frozen orange concentrate
Orangeade, 46 oz .
Pineapple juice
46 oz. ...........
18 oz. ........ ... ............
Tomato juice
46 oz .................... ........
18 oz. ..................... ...
Grape juice, 24 oz. ..........


price


Store B


price

.35

.09
.11
.11


price


ce


.14



.25


pri

.29 -
.13 -

.27
.12
.21-
.26


.25
2/.21
.25


.37
2/.31


22 .29
2/.25 -- 2/.29
.35 .39


price

- .33
. .14

S- .27
-.12
.24


.29
.12
.39)


.31
2/.29


.39
2/.31

.33
2/.29
.37


.31
2/.29


1






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


in the city are presented in Table 1. The period of interview
was one of relative stability in the prices of citrus and possible
competing products. An increase in the price of orangeade was
the only notable general change. There was an upward adjust-
ment in prices of orange juice, grapefruit juice, and of several
other items in one store.
Procedure in Presentation of Findings.-The body of the re-
port consists of a factual presentation of findings, along with
interpretations and possible implications of those findings for
industry groups. It is to be emphasized that implications are
based on a study of a sample of households in one Southern city
in the spring of 1951. Throughout the report, major findings
are presented in condensed form, accompanied by limited sta-
tistical compilations. A copy of the schedule of questions on
which the report is based and a complete tabulation of responses
to these questions are available in the form of a mimeographed
appendix."

EXTENT OF USE OF CITRUS PRODUCTS IN GENERAL
Citrus products were widely used in Meridian households.
Almost 95 percent of the homemakers interviewed reported the
use of some citrus product 9 in the 12-month period before the
interview. Half of the remaining 5 percent of non-users ate no
meals in the home. The 2.5 percent who ate meals at home, but
did not use citrus products, were generally characterized by low
educational levels, low incomes and advanced age. In a small
number of households dietary restrictions caused non-use of
citrus products.
FORMS OF CITRUS PRODUCTS SERVED
Of the six general forms-fresh fruit, frozen concentrate,
canned juice, canned sections, hot-pack concentrate and orange-
ade-in which citrus fruits are marketed, the fresh fruits and
canned juices were most popular (Figure 1). Frozen concen-
trates and orangeade, although only recently introduced, were
already used in more than one-fourth of the households. The
least popular form, hot-pack concentrate, had been introduced
to Meridian homemakers even more recently than frozen con-
centrates.

SCopies may be obtained by requesting from the Agricultural Experi-
ment Station, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
See Table 2 for list of the 17 products studied.







Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


INDIVIDUAL CITRUS PRODUCTS SERVED

Most homemakers used a variety of citrus products. In
several households, as many as 13 of the 17 products included in
the study were used; but six was the number of products re-
ported by the largest number of homemakers. About equal
numbers of homemakers reported using more than six products
and less than six.

TABLE 2.-CONSUMPTION OF SELECTED CITRUS PRODUCTS, 660 MERIDIAN,
MISSISSIPPI, HOUSEHOLDS, WEEK AND YEAR PRIOR TO INTERVIEW, MARCH-
APRIL 1951.


Citrus Products


Fresh fruit
Oranges ..........- .....
Tangerines** .........
Grapefruit ...............
Canned juices
Orange ...................
Grapefruit ................
B lend .... ....... ......
Tangerine ..............
Canned sections
Orange .......- ...- ....
Grapefruit ..............
M ixed ...... ..............
Frozen concentrate
Orange ............ ....
Grapefruit ................
B lend ......................
Hot-pack concentrate
Orange ...................
Grapefruit ................
Orangeade ....................


Households Using Year
Prior to Interview

(percent) (number)


93.8
77.3
75.9

75.6
60.8
20.3
6.7

8.3
20.9
5.9

30.0
4.5
3.5

13.6
3.5
25.9


Using and reporting consumption.
holds in which a product was used.


619
510
501

499
401
134
44

55
138
39

198
30
23

90
23
u 171
Quantities used


Per Capita Consumption
of Persons in House-
holds Using' Week Prior
to Interview
(pounds) '(persons)


1.85 1,234
266
1.56 633
(ounces)
20.7 709
16.9 389
8.4 32
10.3 7

8.0 10
9.0 46
10.5 4

4.2 225
3.0 2
4.0 6

4.0 66
3.8 8
24.8 67
were not reported for all house-


** Or satsumas: no data were obtained on the amounts consumed.


Considerable variation in the extent of use of individual citrus
products was indicated by both the proportions of homemakers
using the products during the year and by per capital consump-
tion in those households using the product during the week prior
to the interview (Table 2). The most popular products were
oranges, grapefruit, canned orange juice and canned grapefruit
juice. Two relatively new citrus products-frozen orange con-
centrate and orangeade-although used by much smaller pro-
portions of the homemakers, were fifth and sixth.
Per capital consumption data for fresh oranges and grapefruit






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


indicate that oranges are used at a higher rate, as well as by a
larger proportion of homemakers. The relative importance of
orange juice and grapefruit juice among canned juices, as indi-
cated by the proportion of users, is confirmed by the per capital
consumption data. Products such as hot-pack grapefruit con-
centrate, frozen blended concentrate, frozen grapefruit concen-
trate, canned mixed sections, canned tangerine juice and canned
orange sections were used by very few homemakers at any time
during the year. Data on per capital consumption of these pro-
ducts are of limited reliability because of the small numbers of
users during the week prior to the interview.
The variation found in extent of use of the different products
has certain implications for future advertising and merchan-
dising programs. All fresh citrus fruits studied, as well as
canned orange and grapefruit juices, are widely known and used.
Extensive advertising of these products is likely to be less effec-
tive than that devoted to less well-known or newer products.
Sales of products such as hot-pack and frozen grapefruit con-
centrates, frozen blended concentrates, canned mixed sections,
frozen orange concentrate and orangeade may respond much
more favorably to increased promotional activity.
SEASONAL VARIATION IN USE OF CITRUS PRODUCTS
Extensive seasonal variation in use of citrus products is indi-
cated by a comparison of the proportions of homemakers using
the product at any time during the year with the proportions
using it during the week prior to the interview (Figure 3). The
differences between numbers of users were widest in the minor
products. These were served in only a small proportion of house-
holds at any time during the year. Even though fresh oranges
and grapefruit were in plentiful supply on the market at the
time of interview, the number of users at that time was still far
below the number who had used them at some time during the
year.
Direct questioning of homemakers about seasonal variation in
use of the major citrus products showed less seasonal change
than might have been expected from the differences in number
of users during the week and year prior to interview.10 Seasonal
variation in use was greatest in fresh oranges. Forty-nine per-

1o The small proportions of homemakers reporting seasonal variations in
consumption may be due to: (1) constant use throughout the year or (2)
such limited use at any time during the year that the homemaker does not
associate variation with the change in seasons.







Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


cent of the users reported change in use of fresh oranges.
Among the processed products, seasonal variation was greatest
in the use of orangeade. Thirty-seven percent of the users of
orangeade said they varied consumption seasonally. About one-
third of the users of fresh grapefruit, frozen orange concentrate
and canned orange juice reported seasonal change. Just over
one-fourth of the users of grapefruit juice reported such change.
The major citrus products can be classified into three groups
with respect to seasons of heaviest use reported by those home-
makers who varied consumption seasonally. Fresh fruits were
used most extensively in the winter. Use of orange juice and
grapefruit juice was seasonally high in both summer and winter,


Oranges

Tangerines, Se LmUMBB

Grapefruit

Orange Juice

Grapefruit Juice

Orange Concentrate

Orangeade

Grapefruit Sections

Canned Blended Jai :e
Hot-pack Orange
Concentrate
Orange Sections

Tangerine Juice
Canned Mixed
Sections
Frozen Grapefruit
Concentrate
Frozen Blended
Concentrate
Hot-pack Grapefruit
Concentrate
0
Weekly data not av;


10
ailable.


30 40 50
Percent


60 70 80 90


Fig. 3.-Proportions of homemakers using selected products, 660
Meridian, Mississippi, households, week and year prior to interview,
March-April 1951.


11










I I











3





~ I I I i


I I II






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


but slightly higher in summer. Orangeade and frozen orange
concentrate were predominantly summer beverages.
A variety of reasons were given for changing the use of the
various products seasonally. Quality considerations were most
prominent. Users of fresh oranges and fresh grapefruit said
they varied consumption because they couldn't get good quality
fresh fruit throughout the year. Quality of fresh fruit was also
a factor in variation of the consumption of the processed forms
of citrus. Users of canned orange juice, canned grapefruit
juice and frozen orange concentrate said they used these pro-
ducts in larger quantity when good quality fresh fruit was not
available.
Several factors in addition to quality of fresh fruit contrib-
uted to seasonal variation in consumption of citrus products.
Canned orange juice, canned grapefruit juice, frozen orange
concentrate, and especially orangeade were used as light, cool-
ing drinks in the summer. The belief that citrus products were
helpful in preventing colds accounted for seasonally high con-
sumption of a number of the products in winter. Three other
factors were mentioned to explain seasonal variation in con-
sumption of fresh fruit-"don't care for citrus some seasons,"
use of local fresh fruits in season, and high cost of citrus at
certain seasons. A number of other explanations of seasonal
variation were given, but by only small numbers of interviewees.
Seasonal variations in consumption of major citrus products
indicate that, despite advertising activity, it is not possible to
maintain constantly high sales volumes for all products through-
out the year. A large part of the variation appears to be as-
sociated with variations in the quality and availability of fresh
fruit. Since this is the case, advertising might be made more
effective in increasing total sales of citrus products if timed so
as to minimize competition between citrus products. This could
be done by concentrating advertising of individual products in
those seasons when the products are already used most exten-
sively.
NATURE OF THE PREFERRED PRODUCT
An attempt was made to determine whether or not specific
preferences with respect to characteristics of the major citrus
products actually existed; what the preferences were; and
whether or not the preferences were sufficiently strong to pre-
clude purchase of products other than those having the pre-






Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


ferred characteristics. In most instances, preference ratings
were based on answers to questions relative to the type of pro-
duct usually purchased. However, in some instances prefer-
ences were found by direct questioning.
Preferences for fresh oranges and fresh grapefruit are dis-
cussed separately below. The processed juices-canned orange,
canned grapefruit, frozen orange and orangeade--are discussed
as a group, since some similar characteristics are considered for
each product.
FRESH ORANGES
Preferences for fresh oranges from a particular state, of a
particular brand and of a particular kind were studied.
Only one-third of both the white and colored users of oranges
preferred fresh oranges from a particular state. A small num-
ber of homemakers admitted they didn't know the state of
origin of the oranges they purchased. Four-fifths of the col-
ored and 76 percent of the white homemakers, who did have a
preference, preferred Florida oranges. Six percent of the white
and 18 percent of the colored homemakers chose California
fruit. Oranges from Texas and Louisiana were favored by 14
and 3 percent, respectively, of the white, but by none of the
colored respondents.
Preference for oranges from a given state was not strong
among either white or colored respondents. All of the white
homemakers who preferred California, Texas and Louisiana
oranges, and 87 percent of those who preferred Florida oranges,
said they bought fruit from another state when the preferred
fruit was not available. State preferences among colored users
were somewhat stronger. Eighty-three and 84 percent of those
preferring Florida and California oranges, respectively, said they
bought oranges from another state.
Lack of a strong state preference is probably due partially to
the fact that homemakers have, in most instances, no way of
identifying fruit from a particular state. Some homemakers
tend to identify their preferred brands of canned products by
label rather than name; for this reason it seems possible that a
state preference might be built up by the use of a distinctive
brand stamped on each fruit.
There was little evidence of a brand preference for fresh
oranges. Only 13 percent of both white and colored users of
oranges were even familiar with any brand names. California






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


brands were mentioned by three times as many homemakers as
Florida brands.
It is difficult to describe a particular kind of fresh orange
specifically in terms of physical characteristics. To let home-
makers indicate any of the ways in which they identified the
preferred orange, they were asked the very general question,
"Is there any particular kind of orange that you like best?"
Those homemakers who did like a particular kind of orange were
asked what kind of orange, what they liked about that orange,
and whether or not they bought another kind when the preferred
kind was not available.
A large proportion of the homemakers-roughly two-thirds
of the white and three-fourths of the colored-did have in mind
a particular kind of orange they preferred. Physical character-
istics, such as thickness and smoothness of skin, size, weight and
color, were most commonly used to describe the preferred
orange, but a few respondents specified a type or variety.
The largest number of users of oranges-73 percent of the
white and 60 percent of the colored-described the preferred
orange as "thin skinned". A "smooth skin", sometimes as-
sociated with a "thin skin", was specified by 27 percent of the
colored and 11 percent of the white respondents. Very few
homemakers wanted a thick-skinned orange.
Thirty-five percent of the white and 37 percent of the colored
homemakers used relative size in describing the preferred type
of orange. The medium-sized orange, followed by the small one,
received top preference in white households. Among colored
homemakers, large and small oranges were almost equally popu-
lar, while the medium-sized orange was preferred by very few.
Physical characteristics other than those relating to kind of
skin and size were used only infrequently to identify the desired
kind of orange. A "deep-colored" orange was preferred by 14
percent of the colored respondents. A very few respondents
specifically stated that they did not want "color-add" oranges.
Such descriptive terms as heavy, soft, firm or juicy were men-
tioned by small numbers of interviewees.
There was little evidence of familiarity with orange types or
varieties. About one-fourth of the white and 6 percent of the
colored respondents indicated preferences in terms of a par-
ticular type or variety of orange. The "navel" was the type of
orange mentioned most frequently by this group.
What the homemaker really wanted in the orange she pur-






Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


chased was quite clear. When asked the question, "What do you
like about that particular kind of orange (kind preferred) ?", the
answers were almost always the same. Regardless of the terms
used in describing the preferred kind of orange, the homemaker
liked that kind of orange, first, because she thought it was
juicier and, second, because she thought it was sweeter. Other
reasons were given by relatively small numbers of respondents.
"Just tastes better" was the third most important reason of
those persons who specified preference in terms of a particular
kind or variety. This answer was fourth in importance among
those who specified a "thin skin". "Better texture" was the
third most important reason for preferring the thin-skinned
orange. Other reasons for particular preferences, given by a
few homemakers, were "more meat", "easier to peel" and "less
seeds".
Since most homemakers want fresh oranges that are sweet
and juicy, the industry might consider making more fruit with
these characteristics available. This might be achieved, prin-
cipally, through stricter regulation of the quality of fruit moving
to market. Undesirable types or varieties could be eliminated
through more rigid inspection. The maturity standards for
satisfactory varieties might be raised and strictly enforced.
The preference for a particular kind of orange-thin-skinned,
medium-sized, etc.-did not appear to be particularly strong.
Eighty-one percent of the white and 72 percent of the colored
homemakers who had specified a preferred kind of orange,
answered "yes" to the question, "At those times when you can't
get the particular kind of oranges you like best, do you buy some
other kind?"
FRESH GRAPEFRUIT
Preferences for fresh grapefruit were ascertained by question-
ing with respect to two readily identifiable characteristics, color
and presence or absence of seeds. The possibility that home-
makers may identify the preferred grapefruit in terms of state
of production was also investigated.
There was a decided preference for pink over white grape-
fruit. Pink fruit was preferred by 77 percent of the white and
64 percent of the colored users of grapefruit. In contrast, a
preference for white grapefruit was expressed by more colored
than white users-24 percent of the former and 12 percent of
the latter. To 10 percent of the white and 8 percent of the
colored homemakers, color made no difference.






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Those homemakers who preferred white grapefruit felt more
strongly about their preference than did those who preferred
pink. Just 57 percent of the colored and 68 percent of the white
respondents expressing such preference said they bought pink
fruit when the white was unavailable. In contrast, more than
80 percent of both white and colored respondents preferring pink
fruit said they bought white fruit in place of pink under similar
circumstances.
A variety of reasons, mostly not directly associated with color
but rather with the supposed attributes of a given color of fruit,
were given for preferring grapefruit of a particular color. The
major reason for preferring pink grapefruit, given by just over
half of both the white and colored homemakers with such prefer-
ence, was the belief that it was "sweeter" or "less acid". About a
third of the white homemakers could not pin-point the reason for
their preference other than to say they just thought it was
better or liked it better. This same reason was given by about
one-fifth of the colored homemakers. "More juice" and "not so
bitter" were third and fourth in importance to the white re-
spondents. The colored homemakers also attached a great deal
of importance to juice content, and a few mentioned absence of
bitterness. Answers suggesting attractive appearance as the
reason for preferring pink grapefruit were given by approxi-
mately one-tenth of both colored and white respondents.
The few homemakers who expressed a preference for white
grapefruit could not clearly indicate the reasons for their prefer-
ence. "Just like it better or think it's better" was the reason
given by over half the white and 38 percent of the colored inter-
viewees. The belief that white fruit was sweeter or less acid was
expressed by about one-fourth of the colored homemakers. Other
reasons were diverse and given by small numbers of home-
makers.
Responses to the question, "When you can get grapefruit both
with and without seeds, which do you usually buy?", revealed
less clear-cut preferences than those expressed about color. A
number of homemakers did not indicate a preference. Instead,
they gave such replies as: "never know what I'm getting, but
would buy seedless if I knew"; "thought all grapefruit had
seeds"; or "buy only kind grocer has". Those persons who did
usually buy a particular kind showed a preference for the seed-
less fruit by margins of approximately 10 to 1 in white and 5 to







Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


1 in colored households.l Fourteen percent of the white and 20
percent of the colored homemakers indicated they had no prefer-
ence, by saying they bought fruit both with and without seeds.
White and colored respondents showed practically no differ-
ence in the strength of their preferences for fruit either with or
without seeds; but in both races, those who wanted fruit with
seeds felt more strongly about their preferences. Sixty-nine
percent of those who usually bought fruit with seeds said they
bought the opposite kind when the preferred kind was not avail-
able. In contrast, 92 percent of those who preferred seedless
fruit said they bought the opposite kind.
The reasons given for usually buying fruit with and without
seeds were quite different. Four-fifths of those who usually
bought seedless fruit did so for reasons of convenience. "Less
waste" was the only other reason given by any appreciable num-
ber-12 percent of the respondents. "More juice", "tastes
better", and "like better" were other reasons given. Those
persons who usually bought fruit with seeds were not particu-
larly clear as to the reasons for their action. Over half gave
"just tastes better" or "just like better" as the reasons for
buying fruit with seeds. Approximately one-third said they
didn't know why they bought fruit with seeds.
Very few MIeridian homemakers had a preference for grape-
fruit from any particular state. Only 16 percent of the white
and 12 percent of the colored users of grapefruit indicated a
state preference. Approximately 5 percent admitted they did not
know the origin of the grapefruit purchased.
Those white and colored users of grapefruit who did express
a state preference had very different preferences. Florida fruit
was preferred by 83 percent of the colored but by only 30 per-
cent of the white homemakers. There was a decided preference
for Texas fruit among white users, as contrasted with colored
users-70 to 6 percent, respectively. California was mentioned
as the preferred source of grapefruit by no white and very few
colored respondents.
The small number of homemakers who expressed a preference
for grapefruit from a particular state did not feel very strongly
about their preferences. Four-fifths of the white and two-thirds

The percentages were: in white households, 5.8 percent with, 55.1 per-
cent without seeds; in colored households, 10.3 percent with, and 48.7 per-
cent without seeds.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


of the colored homemakers said they bought fruit from another
state when the preferred fruit was unavailable.
Due to the small number of homemakers reporting a state
preference for grapefruit, reasons for preferences are not as-
sociated with each state, but are instead the reasons for state
preferences in general. The reasons given provide an indication
of the qualities consumers desire in grapefruit, and believe to be
associated with fruit from a particular state. Reasons given
were, in order of frequency, "sweeter", "just like it", "more
juice", "not so bitter", and "tender meat". Other reasons
listed by small numbers of respondents were "fewer seeds",
"never tried fruit from another state", and some type of personal
attachment to the preferred state.
The data on grapefruit preferences suggest the desirability
of giving consideration, in any future plantings, to pink and
seedless varieties. As with oranges, a more strenuous effort to
place sweeter and juicier fruit on the market might be expected
to stimulate sales. Clearly identifying seedless fruit in retail
stores might also be useful in increasing total grapefruit sales.
PROCESSED CITRUS FRUITS
Preferences with respect to brands, sweetened vs. unsweet-
ened juices, and can sizes were studied for various products.
There was evidence that marketing agencies had been success-
ful in establishing brand preferences for the most popular forms
of processed citrus fruits. The proportion of homemakers who
usually bought the same brand of a given product ranged from
54 to 78 percent (Table 3). Approximately equal proportions of
colored and white homemakers usually bought the same brand
of orange juice and grapefruit juice; but much larger propor-
tions of colored homemakers had favorite brands of frozen
orange concentrate and orangeade. Brand preferences for all
products, except orangeade, were stronger in the colored house-
holds, as indicated by the smaller proportions of colored home-
makers who bought other brands when their favorites were un-
available.
Despite the large number of brands of the various products
available, relatively few brands were specified as favorites by
any large proportion of the users. Only two brands of canned
orange juice were mentioned prominently. One brand of canned
grapefruit juice was specified as the favorite by over half of the
white respondents expressing a brand preference for grapefruit







Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


juice. Two brands of frozen orange concentrate and one of
orangeade were mentioned by large proportions of the home-
makers. As many as 30 percent (in the case of frozen con-
centrate) of those who preferred specified brands of various pro-
ducts could not name their favorite brand but said they identi-
fied it by the label.

TABLE 3.-PROPORTIONS OF WHITE AND COLORED USERS OF SELECTED PRO-
DUCTS WHO USUALLY PURCHASED THE SAME BRAND, AND PROPORTIONS
WHO BOUGHT SUBSTITUTE BRANDS WHEN THE PREFERRED BRANDS WERE
UNAVAILABLE, MERIDIAN, MISSISSIPPI, HOUSEHOLDS,* YEAR PRIOR TO
INTERVIEW, MARCH-APRIL 1951.

Buy Same Brand Buy Substitute
Product Brand
White Colored White Colored
(percent) (percent)
Orange juice ..................... 58 61 77 74
Frozen orange concentrate .. 54 78 76 68
Orangeade ........................... 57 71 73 82
Grapefruit juice ............... 61 61 75 63

*For number of households in which each product was used, see Table 2.

The reasons given for usually purchasing a given brand varied
considerably between races and, to a lesser degree, between pro-
ducts. Taste reasons-"tastes more like fresh", "not tinny or
bitter", "just like or tastes better"- were mentioned more fre-
quently and by larger proportions of white than colored respon-
dents. Habit, expressed by such phrases as "just always used
or bought that brand", was much more frequently given as a
reason by the colored homemakers.
Relative price of brands was a minor consideration in both
white and colored households, and for all products. Less than
2 percent of the white and less than 4 percent of the colored
homemakers reported "cheaper" as the reason for usually buying
the same brand. Availability of brands was an important con-
sideration in explaining the purchase of a particular brand of
orangeade. Thirty-eight and 42 percent, respectively, of the
white and colored homemakers gave "only kind grocer has" as
the reason for usually buying the same brand.
Most homemakers usually bought citrus juices in the same
sized can (Table 4). This was the practice in a larger propor-
tion of white than colored households. The size bought varied







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


with race and product. The largest proportion of white home-
makers usually bought orange juice in 46-ounce cans, while
colored homemakers favored the 18-ounce size.1' Both white
and colored homemakers favored the 18-ounce can in their pur-
chases of grapefruit juice. Orangeade was purchased in 46-
ounce cans by the largest proportion of homemakers, but more
than 40 percent of the colored homemakers usually bought the
12-ounce size. Although orange juice and grapefruit juice were
available in several can sizes other than 46- and 18-ounce, very
few homemakers usually bought any of these sizes.

TABLE 4.-PROPORTIONS OF WHITE AND COLORED USERS OF SELECTED
JUICES WHO USUALLY BUY THE SAME SIZE OF CAN; AND PROPORTIONS OF
THOSE BUYING SAME SIZE WHO BUY 46- AND 18-OUNCE SIZE, MERIDIAN,
MISSISSIPPI, HOUSEHOLDS,: YEAR PRIOR TO INTERVIEW, MARCH-APRIL
1951.

Usually Buy Buy 46 Ounce I Buy 18 Ounce
Product Same Size
White | Colored White I Colored White [ Colored
(percent) (percent) (percent)

Orange juice -.......... 82 76 55 29 39 1 64
Grapefruit juice .... 84 80 45 21 54 72
Orangeade ... ....... 90 84 81 57 18 43**

For number of households in which each product was used, see Table 2.
** 12-ounce can.

On the basis of the assumption that reasons for preferring a
particular can size would be about the same regardless of pro-
duct, reasons were obtained only from those individuals who
specified a particular size of can for orange juice. Reasons for
use of the 46- and 18-ounce cans are considered separately.
Both white and colored homemakers who usually purchased
the 46-ounce can explained their purchases in about the same
way. The belief that juice could be purchased more economically
in the 46-ounce can was the reason given by the largest number
of interviewees. The large size can is "just the right size for
the family", and "means less trips to the grocery store", were

1 Users of orange juice who indicated they usually purchased a par-
ticular size were asked if they purchased another size when the size
usually purchased was unavailable. Three-fourths of both colored and
white respondents usually purchasing the 18-ounce size said they bought
another size. Eighty-four percent of the white and 90 percent of the
colored homemakers usually buying the 46-ounce size bought another size.







Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


the second and third most important reasons. Both were given
by much smaller numbers of respondents than gave the first
reason.
More than half of both white and colored homemakers used
the 18-ounce can because it was the "right size for the family".
A closely allied reason, or another way of expressing the same
reason, was given by 24 percent of the white respondents-"the
18-ounce can of juice can be used at one serving". More than
one-fourth of the colored homemakers said they bought the 18-
ounce can because it was cheaper or more economical. Com-
ments made by the enumerators indicated that what the colored
homemakers really meant was that the total cost of 18 ounces
of juice was less than the total cost of 46 ounces, and that the
price of the 18-ounce can was all they could spend for orange
juice.
TABLE 5.-PROPORTIONS OF WHITE AND COLORED USERS OF ORANGE AND
GRAPEFRUIT JUICE WHO USUALLY BUY SWEETENED AND UNSWEETENED
JUICES; AND PROPORTIONS OF USERS OF SWEETENED AND UNSWEETENED
JUICES WHO BUY OPPOSITE TYPES WHEN TYPE USUALLY BOUGHT IS UN-
AVAILABLE, MERIDIAN, MISSISSIPPI, HOUSEHOLDS,* YEAR PRIOR TO INTER-
VIEW, MARCH-APRIL 1951.

Product and Type Usually Buy Buy Opposite
SWhite I Colored White 'Colored
(percent) (percent)
Orange juice, sweetened ...... 58 59 73 69
Orange juice, unsweetened .. 25 29 50 62
Grapefruit juice, sweetened.. 43 43 71 56
Grapefruit juice, unsweetened 45 45 58 58

For number of households in which each product was used, see Table 2.
There was a decided preference for sweetened over unsweet-
ened orange juice, but sweetened and unsweetened forms of
grapefruit juice were almost equally popular (Table 5). Pre-
ferences of colored and white homemakers were practically
identical, except in the case of unsweetened orange juice. As
indicated by the proportions of users who bought the opposite
kind when the kind usually bought was unavailable, homemakers
who usually bought sweetened juice were generally more willing
to substitute than were those who bought unsweetened. Fewer
colored than white homemakers who used sweetened juices were
willing to substitute. Since these preferences are so strong on
the part of many homemakers as to preclude purchase of op-







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


posite types, production should, insofar as other considerations
warrant, be adapted to these preferences.
White and colored homemakers emphasized different reasons
in explaining their preferences for sweetened juices. Taste
reasons such as, "just like better", "aversion to a sour or acid
taste", and "not bitter" were predominant in explaining use of
sweetened juices by white homemakers. Colored users of sweet-
ened juices appeared to think that all unsweetened juices had to
have sugar added, and therefore gave as most important reasons
for using sweetened juices: (1) convenience-there was no need
to add sugar before serving; and (2) economy- saving effected
by not having to add sugar.
Taste reasons, particularly "it tastes more like fresh", were
also used by white homemakers in explaining their preference
for unsweetened juices. "Just like better", and an aversion to
anything sweet, were other taste reasons given. The desire to
sweeten juices to taste was the first consideration of colored
homemakers in explaining their preference for unsweetened
orange juice and second, in explaining the preference for un-
sweetened grapefruit juice. Health reasons, such as "can't use
sugar", were first in importance to colored homemakers in ex-
plaining their preference for unsweetened grapefruit juice, and
were also mentioned by white homemakers using both unsweet-
ened grapefruit and orange juices.

MANNER AND OCCASION OF SERVING CITRUS PRODUCTS
A knowledge of the form in which fresh citrus fruits are
served, and of the occasions at which both fresh and processed
products are served, can be useful in studying substitution and
in planning effective advertising. To supply information needed
for these purposes, all persons who had used fresh fruit at any
time during the year were asked to indicate the forms in which
they served the fruit; and those persons who had used the
various fresh and processed citrus fruits the week prior to the
interview were asked the number of times each product was
served at breakfast, lunch, dinner and between meals.
FORMS IN WHICH FRESH FRUITS WERE SERVED
Individual users of fresh oranges indicated they had served
oranges in as many as five different ways during the year. Serv-
ing as juice or for eating out of hand were the ways of serving
mentioned by the largest numbers of both white and colored
respondents. Serving in the form of juice and for eating out of








Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


hand were each reported by about three-fourths of the white
and a slightly smaller proportion of colored homemakers. Use
in desserts, such as ambrosia, was the third most important use,
but it was mentioned by only about half as many persons as had
mentioned either use as a juice or for eating out of hand. White
homemakers served fresh oranges in salads but very few colored
homemakers reported such use. Other ways of serving fresh
oranges reported were: in halves, in cakes and in orangeade.
Fresh grapefruit was served in a variety of ways. Cut in
halves, reported by 97 percent of the homemakers, was by far
the most popular way. The second most popular manner of
serving-in salads-was reported by only 11 percent of the re-
spondents. Serving in such forms as sections, fresh juice, and
whole for eating out of hand, was reported by very small num-
bers of homemakers.

OCCASION OF SERVING CITRUS PRODUCTS
Citrus products were served principally at breakfast and be-
tween meals, with only limited serving reported at other oc-
casions (Table 6). Fresh grapefruit and canned orange and

TABLE 6.-NUMBERS OF WHITE AND COLORED HOMEMAKERS SERVING SE-
LECTED CITRUS PRODUCTS AND PROPORTIONS SERVING ON VARIOUS OC-
CASIONS, MERIDIAN, MISSISSIPPI, HOUSEHOLDS, WEEK PRIOR TO INTERVIEW,
MARCH-APRIL 1951.

Number
Using Occasion of Serving
Product and Race During Break- Between
the Week fast Lunch Dinner Meals
(percent) *

Oranges
W hite .................... 234 57.3 3.0 6.4 81.6
Colored ................ 123 58.5 11.4 6.5 78.0
Grapefruit
W hite ................. 147 93.9 4.1 12.9 13.6
Colored .................. 49 91.8 2.0 12.2 18.4
Orange juice
W hite .. ........ ... 127 73.2 1.6 7.1 67.7
Colored ......------- -- 76 78.9 10.5 17.1 44.7
Granefruit juice
White --.--- ..... --.. 79 73.4 3.8 7.6 49.4
Colored ............... 48 75.0 12.5 12.5 27.1
Orange concentrate
W hite ..................- 54 68.5 3.7 3.7 42.6
Colored .........-..... 12 25.0 16.7 33.3
Orangeade
White ....... ..-.. 11 27.3 18.2 72.7
Colored .................. 10 60.0 30.0 30.0 70.0

Where percentages, adding across, total more than 100, homemakers gave more than
one time of serving; and where less than 100, all times of serving were not ascertained.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


grapefruit juices were all served most extensively at breakfast.
Serving between meals was practiced most extensively by the
users of fresh oranges but was also common among users of
canned orange and grapefruit juices. Relatively few home-
makers served any citrus products at lunch or dinner. Serving
at these occasions was more common among colored than white
homemakers.
The present manner of use and occasion when citrus products
are served indicate potential areas to be stressed in future ad-
vertising. Advertising might be of increased effectiveness in
promoting market expansion if directed specifically toward en-
couragement of serving citrus products in new or less common
ways, and toward serving at occasions other than breakfast and
between meals.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CONSUMER CHARACTER-
ISTICS AND VARIATIONS IN CONSUMPTION OF
SELECTED CITRUS PRODUCTS

Observations with respect to the relationship between use of
citrus products and consumer characteristics are presented with
the recognition that they are subject to at least two major
limitations: (1) an insufficient number of cases in any one cell
(income group, for example) to permit generalization; and (2)
the impossibility of separately measuring the influence of any
one characteristic. Both of these may be traced in part to a
small sample.
The first limitation has influenced the amount as well as the
reliability of information presented. Observations on relation-
ships are based only on comparisons of proportions of home-
makers, in various characteristic groups, who had used the
product under consideration at some time during the year prior
to interview. Per capital consumption estimates, although cal-
culated, are not presented.13 There were too few users of many
of the minor products to permit even observations based on pro-
portions of users.

1 Even with fresh oranges, the product used by more persons than any
other, the differences between average per capital consumption in the vari-
ous income groups were not statistically significant for either white,
colored or total populations (the test employed was the standard error of
the difference between means). This is not meant to imply that the differ-
ences between consumption in various income groups would be statistically
significant in a larger sample; but only that the small sample is one
possible reason for the lack of significance.







Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


The possibility of interrelationship between consumer char-
acteristics makes it impossible to state definitely that any ob-
served result is due to a particular characteristic. For example,
the association observed between family income and level of
education of the homemaker (Figure 4) would make it difficult
to decide whether any observed use or non-use, or level of con-
sumption of a product, was the result of the amount of money
the homemaker had to spend or of her education. The largest
proportion of households in the low income group is also in the
lowest educational level, while very few households are in the
higher educational levels. In the middle income group, the
concentration of households is in the educational groups-"some,
or completed, high school". High income households fall in
largest number in the "completed high school" group but are
distributed throughout the "some high school" to the "com-
pleted college" groups.

Percent


20


1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Under $S0 $40-79 Over $80
Income Groups and Educational Levels
1. None or some grammar 4. Finished high
2. Finished grammar 5. Some college
3. Some high 6. Finished college

Fig. 4.-Percentage distribution of homemakers by level of education
within weekly income groups, 660 Meridian, Mississippi, households, March-
April 1951.

Citrus products considered in the study of relationships be-
tween consumer characteristics and use were fresh oranges,
fresh grapefruit, canned orange juice, canned grapefruit juice,
frozen orange concentrate, and orangeade. The consumer char-
acteristics related to use of these products were race, family
income, education of homemaker, age of homemaker, and family
composition. Where the number of users of any product was
sufficiently large,14 white and colored populations were treated
separately in studying the relationships.


In general, when there were less than 20 users in any one group, re-
lationships were presented for the combined white-colored population only.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


RACE
With but few exceptions, citrus products were used in larger
proportions of white than colored households (Table 7). The
proportions of colored users exceeded the proportions of white
users in the use of several of the minor products-canned blended
juice, grapefruit and blended frozen concentrates, and hot-pack
orange and grapefruit concentrates. Generally, the differences
between proportions of users in white and colored households
were small. Canned orange juice was used by identical propor-
tions of both racial groups. The widest margins in proportions
of white over colored users were in the use of fresh grapefruit,
canned grapefruit sections and frozen orange concentrate.

TABLE 7.-PROPORTIONS OF WHITE AND COLORED HOMEMAKERS USING SE-
LECTED CITRUS PRODUCTS, 424 WHITE AND 236 COLORED HOUSEHOLDS,
MERIDIAN, MISSISSIPPI, YEAR PRIOR TO INTERVIEW, MARCH-APRIL 1951.

Product Homemakers
White | Colored
(percent)
Fresh fruit
O ranges ......... ....... ..... ..... ..... ... 96 89
Grapefruit .... .. ................ ... ...... 81 66
Tangerines --- ----.. ---- --- --... .................. -.... 79 73
Canned juices
Orange .....-- ------ ..... ....... .. -... ....................-. 76 76
Grapefruit .. .......... ....- .......-.. ........ ......... 62 58
B lend 1........ ....... ..... ....... .... 9 22
Tangerine -..-.- -..-.....-. ................ .. ..... 7 6
Canned sections
O range ......... ......... ....... ............. 9 7
Grapefruit ...... ---..... --.......... ........... .. 28 9
M ixed ... --........................... .................................. 6 5
Frozen concentrate
Orange .----. ..-- .....---- -..... ........................ 38 15
G rapefruit ---------.....--- .-- ..--.. ... ...... ...... ..... .... .. 4 5
Blend -....-....... ............. .......... ........ 3 4
Hot-pack concentrate
Orange -..-...-.... ..... ....-. ............. ................... 13 14
Grapefruit ........ .. .... ................................ 2 6
Orangeade ... .................. ...... ..... .. ........ ...... 27 24

FAMILY INCOME
The proportion of homemakers using a selected citrus product
during the year prior to the interview was related to estimated
weekly family income, after taxes. Income data were collected
in 12 different group intervals beginning with "under 20 dollars
per week" and ending with "more than 150 dollars per week".
To provide a sufficient number of cases for meaningful compari-








Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


Fresh Oranges


Fresh Grapefruit


Income Income


Grapefruit Juice


Income Income


Orangeade


L M H L M H L M H L M H
Income Income
L Low M Medium H High
White ( Colored

Fig. 5.-Relationship between income and proportion of homemakers
using selected citrus products, 424 white and 236 colored homemakers,
Meridian, Mississippi, year prior to interview, March-April 1951.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


son, all incomes were divided into three approximately equal '
groups designated as low, middle and high. The low, middle and
high income groups among white families consisted of those
families with incomes under 60, 60 to 100, and 100 dollars and
over per week. Income breaks for the colored groups were under
20, 20 to 40, and over 40 dollars.16
Income appeared to be more positively associated with use of
citrus products in colored than in white households (Figure 5).
Use consistently increased from low, to middle, to high income
groups in the proportion of colored homemakers using all major
citrus products except fresh grapefruit. Use of grapefruit in-
creased markedly between the low and middle income colored
groups, but declined slightly between the middle and the high.
In white households the only consistent positive relationship
discernible was for frozen orange juice. Fresh oranges and
fresh grapefruit were used by about equal proportions of home-
makers in the middle and high income groups and by slightly
lower proportions in the low groups. Use of canned orange
juice was equal in the low and middle, but dropped off sharply
in the high income groups. No consistent relationship existed
between income and the use of orangeade and grapefruit juice
in white households.
The proportion of colored homemakers in the low income
groups using each product was lower than the proportion of
white homemakers. Use by colored homemakers, in all income
groups, was proportionately lower than that of white home-
makers for fresh oranges, fresh grapefruit and frozen orange
concentrate.
EDUCATION OF HOMEMAKER
The sample population was divided into six educational groups
on the basis of the highest level of education attained by the
homemaker-none or some grammar school, completed gram-
mar school, some high school, completed high school, some col-
lege and completed college. Approximately half of the colored
homemakers were included in the "none or some grammar"
group, while very few were included in any of the groups above
"some high school". The small numbers of colored homemakers
in the upper educational brackets made it impossible to present

Equal grouping could only be approximated, since original data were
collected in terms of class intervals.
1 The different income breaks were necessitated by the widely divergent
income distribution between white and colored households. See Figure 2.








Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


separate consumption-education relationships for colored home-
makers. Accordingly, relationships presented are for white,
and/or combined white-colored populations, only.
The relationships between use and education varied among
citrus products. Most consistent increases in the proportion of
users reported with increasing levels of education occurred in
fresh grapefruit and frozen orange concentrate (Figure 6). The


Fresh Oranges


Orange Juice
Percent

75


50

25


123456
Educational level
Frozen Concentrate



50

25


1 2 3 4 5 6
Educational level


Fresh Grapefruit
Percent
100

75

50


25 l


123456 1
Educational
Grapefruit Juice
Percent

75-


50

25


12 3 4 56
Educational level

Orangeade
75
Pe ant


50


25-


123 456
Educational level


White Total


1. Grammar, none, some
2. Grammar, completed
3. High, some


4. High, completed
5. College, some
6. College, completed


Fig. 6.-Relationship between education and proportion of homemakers
using selected citrus products, 424 white and 236 colored homemakers,
Meridian, Mississippi, year prior to interview, March-April 1951.


23456
level







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


use of frozen orange concentrate increased markedly with in-
creased education-from less than 10 percent of the home-
makers at the lowest educational level to more than 70 at the
highest. Even in fresh oranges, which were used by almost all
homemakers, an increase in the proportion of users was re-
corded with increased education. No definite relationship was
discernible between education and the use of orangeade, canned
orange juice, or canned grapefruit juice.

Fresh Oranges Fresh Grapefruit
Per- nt Per ent
100 100

75-

50- 50

25- 25

0 0
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Age Age
Orange Juice Grapefruit Juice
Percent Percent
75 75

50 H 50

25 25

0oil o I I 1
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 45
Age Age
Orange Concentrate Orangeade


1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Age Age
WhiteI Colored Total[]


1. Less than 30
2. 30 39
3. 40 49


4. 50 59
5. 60 or more


Fig. 7.-Relationship between age and proportion of homemakers using
selected citrus products, 424 white and 236 colored homemakers, Meridian,
Mississippi, year prior to interview, March-April 1951.







Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


AGE OF HOMEMAKER
All homemakers were classified into five age groups. The
groups were under 30, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59 and over 60 years of
age. Separate breakdowns for colored, white and total popula-
tions were made for most products. Due to the small number
of users, only the total population breakdown is presented for
orangeade and frozen orange juice.
There was less evidence of association between use of citrus
products and age than between use and either income or educa-
tion. There was some tendency for use of fresh oranges and
canned orange juice, in colored households, to decline with in-
creased age of the homemaker (Figure 7). A similar relation-
ship existed for the use of orangeade in the combined white-
colored group households. The only other relationship apparent
was that of very limited use of canned grapefruit juice in both
youngest and most advanced age groups of both white and col-
ored homemakers.
FAMILY COMPOSITION
Family composition was described on the basis of presence or
absence of children and the ages of the children present.17 Four
family groups were delineated-these were those containing:
children under 6, only; children 6-16, only; children in both
age groups; and adults (persons 17 years of age or older) only.
The relationship between family composition and use of citrus
products was not consistent among either products or racial
groups. Use of fresh oranges and canned orange juice in col-
ored households was proportionately highest in the "children
under 6", and lowest in the "adult" groups (Figure 8). In white
households the smallest proportions of users of these products
were also found in the adult groups; but there was practically no
difference between the other three groups. Fresh grapefruit
and canned grapefruit juice were used by larger proportions of
white homemakers in the "children under 6" group. In contrast,
use of canned grapefruit juice in colored households containing
children under 6 was proportionately lowest. Orangeade was
used by a larger proportion of families with children under 6.

7 Average size of households, in terms of number of persons, is another
element of family composition which may influence use of citrus products.
Our limited data indicate, however, that size of households may be most
important in influencing per capital consumption. The average size of
households, from largest to smallest, usually was-families with: children
in both age groups, children 6-16, children under 6, and adults only.
Colored households were usually larger than white.







36 Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations

Fresh Oranges Fresh Grapefruit
l ~ 100

75



25-

--1
1 2 3 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Family composition Family composition
Orange Juice Grapefruit Juice
Percent Per ent
100 100

75 75-



25 i 2 -

0 ... .. _LLL l nl
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 2 3 4 1 2 34
Family composition Family composition
Orange Concentrate Orangeade
Plent Pleent

25 IF 25 -


1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
Family composition Family composition

White
1. Children (under 6) 3. Children in both groups
2. Children (6 16) C.i,:.rea 4. Adults (only)
Total

Fig. 8.-Relationship between family composition and proportion of
homemakers using selected citrus products, 424 white and 236 colored
homemakers, Meridian, Mississippi, year prior to interview, March-April
1951.


SUBSTITUTION AMONG CITRUS AND BETWEEN CITRUS
AND NON-CITRUS PRODUCTS

A portion of the variation in consumption of any given citrus
product may be attributed to the use of some other product or
products-either citrus or non-citrus. In this study an attempt
was made to determine just what non-citrus products were ac-







Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi 37

ceptable as substitutes for citrus products, in general, for certain
uses and what other citrus and non-citrus products were substi-
tuted for a given citrus product under one or several sets of
circumstances.
FRESH NON-CITRUS FRUITS SUBSTITUTED FOR FRESH
CITRUS FRUITS
The use of some kind of fresh non-citrus fruits in place of s
fresh citrus fruits was reported by 77 percent of the white, and
70 percent of the colored homemakers who used fresh citrus
fruits during the year prior to interview. Apples, bananas, and
peaches were the most popular substitutes. The relative
popularity of these and other fruits varied between races and
for the several occasions of serving.
Apples were the top-ranking substitute for fresh citrus fruits
when the white and colored populations were considered collec-
tively. In white households bananas were equally as popular
as apples. Colored homemakers, however, mentioned bananas
only two-thirds as many times as apples. Peaches, although
third in total popularity, were mentioned much less frequently
than either apples or bananas. Strawberries and grapes, the
fourth- and fifth-ranking substitutes, were almost equally im-
portant, but were mentioned just over one-fourth as frequently
as apples. Colored homemakers favored grapes over straw-
berries by a margin of more than two to one. White homemakers
specified strawberries one and one-half times as often as grapes.
Serving of fresh non-citrus fruits in place of fresh citrus
fruits occurred most frequently at breakfast or between meals.2"
Apples were served primarily between meals in both colored and
white households; but serving at some meal was also reported
about half as frequently in colored and more than half as fre-
quently in white households. Both white and colored home-
makers used bananas most extensively between meals and at
breakfast. Some use at lunch and dinner also was reported.

It would be of little value in studying substitution merely to know the
number of homemakers who served a non-citrus fruit or the quantities
served. Such data in themselves are not evidence of substitution. The
products are substitutes for citrus only if used in place of citrus products.
Popularity is based on a number obtained by adding the numbers of
homemakers serving a product at each occasion-breakfast, lunch, dinner,
between meals-and the number serving a product but not specifying an
occasion of serving, or specifying a form rather than occasion of serving.
Each homemaker, therefore, is counted once for each occasion at which a
product was served.
2"This is of necessity true, since the fresh citrus fruits were served
primarily on these two occasions.






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Twice as many white homemakers served peaches at breakfast
as between meals. Colored homemakers served peaches most
extensively at lunch and dinner, while white homemakers made
more limited servings on these occasions. Strawberries were
served by the largest number of white homemakers at breakfast.
The few colored homemakers who served strawberries served
them mostly at lunch and dinner. The use of grapes by home-
makers of both races was almost exclusively between meals.
Many factors play a part in determining whether or not substi-
tution takes place and what the substitutes will be. Conditions
encountered in the retail store are probably among these fac-
tors. An attempt was made to determine what factors in the
grocery store influence the homemaker in deciding what kind of
fresh fruit she will purchase.
All interviewees were questioned to determine whether they
made their decisions as to the kind of fresh fruit to be pur-
chased before going to the store. Those interviewees who did
not make their decisions prior to going to the store were asked
what things in the store influenced their decisions. If the inter-
viewee said she went to the store with her decision made, she
was asked if she ever changed her mind, and what things in the
store influenced her to make the change.
A large proportion of the homemakers using fresh citrus
fruits-73 percent of the white and 78 percent of the colored-
did go to the store with the decision made as to the particular
kind of fruit to be purchased. The decision, however, was sub-
ject to change, as indicated by the fact that 62 percent of the
white and 56 percent of the colored homemakers said they
changed their decision in the store. About 72 percent (those
who had not made decisions prior to going to the store plus those
who changed decisions in the store) of the white and 65 percent
of the colored homemakers interviewed were influenced in their
purchases of fresh fruit by what they encountered in the store.
Regardless of whether the homemaker went to the store with
her mind made up or changed it after she arrived, the major
motivating factor was the appearance of the fruit and/or dis-
play (Table 8). The homemaker had a tendency to buy the fruit
which looked best to her. Price was a more important con-
sideration to colored than to white homemakers. Almost a fifth
of the homemakers made a change in contemplated purchases
because what they wanted was not available. Other reasons,







Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


such as "saw something in the store I hadn't seen lately", were
reported by relatively few persons.

TABLE 8.-FACTORS IN THE STORE INFLUENCING THE HOMEMAKER'S DE-
CISION AS TO THE KIND OF FRESH FRUIT PURCHASED, 411 WHITE, AND 212
COLORED HOMEMAKERS;* MERIDIAN, MISSISSIPPI, MARCH-APRIL 1951.

Homemakers Who Homemakers Who
Factor Changed Decision Had Not Made
Decision
White Colored White IColored
(percent reporting)**

Appearance ............................ 87 74 94 80
Price ........................................ 17 34 17 24
Availability ................... ...... 19 18 11 17
Saw something not seen lately 3
Other .................... ........ 2 2 t 2


Number of homemakers ........ 187 92 108 46

The numbers who used some kind of fresh citrus fruit during the year.
** Would total more than 100 because several factors were sometimes reported by a
homemaker.
t Less than one percent.

An attempt was made to determine why the most commonly
substituted fresh non-citrus fruit-apples-was substituted for
the most extensively used fresh citrus fruit-oranges. The
question asked of all respondents who had used apples in place
of oranges for some purpose was, "What are the things that
would cause you to buy apples in place of oranges?"21 Fifty-
nine percent of the replies given by colored and 39 percent of
those given by white homemakers indicated "desire for a change"
was the reason for purchase of apples. The fact that oranges
were not always of good quality was indicated as a reason by
17 and 12 percent of the responses from white and colored inter-
viewees, respectively. Price reasons constituted a small pro-
portion of the total responses. Some of the homemakers, mostly
white, bought apples in place of oranges for school lunches
because oranges were "too messy". Only one other reason was
given-"sometimes buy apples because I want fruit for cooking".

This question confused both enumerators and respondents. Frequently
the replies (not usable in this analysis) merely indicated the reasons for
buying apples and not the reasons for buying apples in place of oranges.






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


NON-CITRUS JUICES SUBSTITUTED FOR CITRUS JUICES
Some kind of non-citrus juice was served in place of citrus
juices by 71 percent of the white and 54 percent of the colored
homemakers. These were relatively smaller proportions than
those who served fresh non-citrus in place of fresh citrus fruits.
Tomato, pineapple and grape juice were, in decreasing order of
importance,22 the non-citrus juices mentioned most frequently.
Tomato juice was mentioned about one and one-half times as
frequently as either pineapple or grape juices. These last were
approximately equally popular. Prune juice, although fourth in
importance, was used much less extensively than the first three
juices. Other non-citrus juices, most prominent of which was
apple, were mentioned by a few homemakers.
There was considerable difference between colored and white
homemakers in relative popularity of the various non-citrus
juices as substitutes for citrus juices. Tomato juice was almost
twice as popular as grape, and more than twice as popular as
pineapple, juice in white households. In colored households
grape was equally popular with tomato juice, but both were only
two-thirds as popular as pineapple juice. Prune juice was of
limited popularity in both white and colored households.
All of the non-citrus juices were served as substitutes for
citrus juices most extensively at breakfast and between meals.
Serving at lunch or dinner, although limited, was more common
in colored than in white households. Pineapple juice was served
by equal numbers of white homemakers both at breakfast and
between meals; but more colored homemakers served it at break-
fast than between meals. Both colored and white homemakers
served tomato juice most frequently at breakfast and between
meals. Use at lunch and dinner also was reported by a number
of homemakers. Grape juice was served to some extent at all
meals, especially breakfast, but use between meals was most ex-
tensive. The few homemakers who served prune juice served it
mostly at breakfast or between meals.

PRODUCTS SUBSTITUTED FOR FRESH ORANGES
Users of fresh oranges were asked what products they used in
place of oranges under two sets of conditions: (1) when they
went to the store intending to buy oranges, but for some reason
could not or did not buy them; and (2) at those seasons of the
22 Determined on the same basis as the relative popularity of fresh non-
citrus fruits. See footnote 19.






Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


year when fresh oranges were not used or used only in limited
quantities.
Under both sets of circumstances, in both white and colored
households, fresh non-citrus fruits were the most frequently
mentioned substitute. When, for some reason, fresh oranges
were not purchased at the store, 54 percent of the colored and
35 percent 23 of the white homemakers said they usually pur-
chased fresh non-citrus fruits. Forty-three percent 24 of the
white and 37 percent of the colored homemakers used fresh non-
citrus fruits when consumption of oranges was at a seasonal
low.
The various kinds of processed orange juices were important
substitutes for fresh oranges. Canned orange juice, the second
most popular substitute, was reported by roughly one-third of
both white and colored homemakers under both sets of circum-
stances. The third-ranking substitute-but among white fami-
lies only-was frozen orange concentrate. Seventeen percent of
the white homemakers mentioned frozen orange concentrate
under both sets of conditions but very few colored interviewees
mentioned it. Orangeade and hot-pack orange concentrate were
used as substitutes in almost negligible proportions of the house-
holds.
Other fresh citrus fruits were used as a substitute for oranges
in 15 percent of the white and 17 percent of the colored house-
holds when the homemaker could not or did not buy the fresh
oranges she intended to buy."- As might be expected, due to
conditions of similar seasonal availability, other fresh citrus
fruit was mentioned less frequently as a substitute at those
periods when consumption of oranges was seasonally low.
Juices, both citrus and non-citrus, were more important as
substitutes when orange consumption was seasonally low than
at those times when for some reason the homemaker just
could not or did not purchase oranges at the store. Citrus juices,
other than the various forms of orange, were used by 11 per-
cent of the white and 13 percent of the colored homemakers
when fresh oranges were out of season; but by only 9 and 3

:' Of 88 white and 66 colored homemakers having had experience of
going to the store to purchase oranges, not purchasing, but purchasing
something else instead.
21 Of those homemakers who varied consumption seasonally and bought
some other product instead.
This situation would occur at those seasons of the year when both
oranges and grapefruit were generally available.






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


percent of the white and colored homemakers, respectively,
when fresh oranges were not purchased as intended. Only 3 per-
cent of the white and 2 percent of the colored homemakers
bought non-citrus juices in place of the intended fresh oranges.
Thirteen percent of the white and 8 percent of the colored home-
makers said they used non-citrus juices when fresh orange con-
sumption was seasonally low.
Evidence that frozen orange concentrate was being substi-
tuted for fresh oranges was gained by questioning the users of
frozen orange concentrate and fresh oranges about changes made
in the use of fresh oranges since use of frozen orange concen-
trate was begun. Approximately one-third of both white and
colored homemakers said they used fewer fresh oranges since they
began using frozen orange concentrate. None reported discon-
tinuing use of fresh oranges.
The introduction of orangeade caused a decline in consumption
of fresh oranges in those households where both fresh oranges
and orangeade had been used the year prior to the interview.
More than one-third of the colored but less than 10 percent of
the white homemakers said they used fewer fresh oranges since
they began using orangeade.
Specific information on the substitution of fresh grapefruit
for fresh oranges was sought by asking, "Are there any uses for
which you sometimes buy grapefruit in place of oranges ?" Only
21 percent of the 364 white homemakers using both fresh grape-
fruit and oranges during the year answered in the affirmative.
Thirty percent of the colored homemakers gave a similar reply.
The major use for which grapefruit was bought in place of
oranges was to serve at breakfast-a use reported by 68 percent
of the white and 63 percent of the colored homemakers who
substituted grapefruit for oranges. Use in salads was the only
other use given by any appreciable proportion of users.
An attempt to get at the motivation back of the substitution
of grapefruit for oranges was made by asking the question,
"What things cause you to buy grapefruit in place of oranges ?"2
"Desire for a change", the reason given by 56 percent of the
colored and 47 percent of the white respondents, was the only
reason given by a large number of interviewees. Eleven percent
of both white and colored homemakers indicated "poor quality

Many answers unsatisfactory for this analysis were obtained because
people merely told why they used grapefruit, not why they used them in-
stead of oranges.






Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


oranges" led them to buy grapefruit. Price was a minor con-
sideration. "Orange prices too high" was a reason given by
only one white and one colored respondent. Some other reason
was given by about one-third of the homemakers; but no ap-
preciable number mentioned any one reason.

PRODUCTS SUBSTITUTED FOR CANNED ORANGE JUICE
Two questions, or series of questions, were asked in the at-
tempt to determine what products were substituted for canned
orange juice. One series of questions was aimed at determining
the products purchased when the homemaker went to the store
specifically intending to purchase canned orange juice but for
some reason did not actually make such a purchase. Persons who
had used canned orange juice at some time during the year, but
had not used it in the week prior to the interview, were asked
the reasons for their current non-use. It was anticipated that
some of these replies would relate to substitution. The number
of persons who mentioned use of some specific product as the
reason for non-use was expressed as a percent of the total num-
ber of persons replying to the question.
Very few homemakers had the experience of going to the store
to buy canned orange juice, not actually buying it, but buying
something else instead. Among the white homemakers having
had this experience 55 percent indicated non-citrus juices were
the substitute purchased. Non-citrus juices and fresh oranges
were equally prominent as the most important substitutes in
colored households. Twenty-four percent of the white home-
makers specified fresh oranges as the product purchased. The
third-ranking substitute, reported by 28 percent of the colored
and 21 percent of the white homemakers, was "other citrus
juices". Other products were reported by such small numbers
of persons as to be of little significance.
About two-thirds of the total "' reasons given by white and 40
percent of those given by colored homemakers in explaining non-
use of canned orange juice in the week prior to interview had
to do with substitution. Use of fresh oranges-a reason given
by 36 percent of the white and 32 percent of the colored home-
makers-was by far the most important reason given for
current non-use. Only a very small proportion of colored home-
makers indicated the use of any other substitute product except
fresh oranges. Fresh grapefruit and other citrus juices were


'- The sum of the numbers of persons giving each reason.






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


each mentioned by about 9 percent of the white homemakers.
Use of frozen orange concentrate accounted for current non-use
of canned orange juice in 6 percent of the white households.
The introduction of frozen orange concentrate appears to have
brought about a marked decline in the use of canned orange
juice. Thirty-six percent of the white and 44 percent of the
colored homemakers using both canned orange juice and frozen
concentrate in the year prior to interview said they used less
canned orange juice since they began using frozen orange con-
centrate. An additional 16 percent of the white and 3 percent
of the colored homemakers said they had discontinued use of
canned orange juice. Approximately half, therefore, of the
homemakers who had served both canned orange juice and
frozen orange concentrate during the year were using less canned
orange juice since frozen orange concentrate had been introduced
into their homes.
The introduction of orangeade had a tendency to decrease
consumption of canned orange juice, particularly in colored
households. More than a third of the colored and 16 percent of
the white homemakers who had used both canned orange juice
and orangeade in the year prior to the interview said they used
less canned orange juice since they began using orangeade.
PRODUCTS SUBSTITUTED FOR FROZEN ORANGE CONCENTRATE
Those persons who had used frozen orange concentrate at
some time during the year, but were not using it currently, were
asked the reasons for their current non-use. About two-thirds
of the total reasons,"2 of all types given, related to substitution
-use of other products instead of frozen orange concentrate.
The substitutes mentioned most prominently were fresh oranges
and canned orange juice. These were the only substitutes men-
tioned by colored homemakers. Use of fresh oranges was indi-
cated as the reason for current non-use of frozen orange concen-
trate by 47 percent of the white and 42 percent of the colored
homemakers. Nineteen percent of the white and 8 percent of
the colored homemakers were currently using canned orange
juice in place of frozen orange concentrate.
An attempt was made to determine whether the use of orange-
ade had any influence on consumption of frozen orange concen-
trate. One-fifth of the small number of white and colored home-
makers who had used both orangeade and frozen orange

28 The sum of the numbers of persons giving each reason.






Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


concentrate during the year said they used less frozen orange
concentrate since they began using orangeade.

PRODUCTS SUBSTITUTED FOR ORANGEADE
Orangeade consumption was at a low level at the time of the
interviews. Use of some other product was a prominent reason
given for current non-use. Fresh oranges and canned orange
juice were the only substitutes given by any appreciable propor-
tion of current non-users of orangeade. Fourteen percent of the
white and 41 percent of the colored homemakers gave use of
fresh oranges as the reason for not using orangeade the week of
the interview. Use of canned orange juice was the reason given
by 14 percent of the white and 28 percent of the colored inter-
viewees.
There was evidence that use of frozen orange concentrate was
having adverse effects on the consumption of orangeade. Of
those homemakers who had used both orangeade and frozen
orange concentrate, 30 percent of the white and 38 percent of the
colored said they used less orangeade since they began using
frozen orange concentrate. Fifteen percent of the white home-
makers said they had stopped using orangeade entirely.

SUBSTITUTION BETWEEN ORANGE PRODUCTS IN GENERAL
To gain some indication of why homemakers substituted one
form of orange juice for another, those homemakers who used
more than one form during the year were asked, "Why is it that
you sometimes serve one form of orange juice and at other times
another form?" The answer given most frequently by both
white and colored respondents-39 percent of the former and 47
percent of the latter-was "just for a change".
"Convenience" was indicated as the reason by 32 percent of
the white and 18 percent of the colored homemakers. "Inability
to get the preferred form at all times" was indicated by 16 per-
cent of the white and 24 percent of the colored interviewees. A
price-associated reason-"some kinds too expensive at times"-
was given by only 10 percent of the white and 12 percent of the
colored respondents. Two other reasons for using more than one
form of orange juice were given, "to please various members of
the family" and "use different forms for different uses".
A specific attempt to gain some knowledge of the role of rela-
tive prices in substitution between orange products was made
by posing the following hypothetical question to all users of
more than one form of orange juice: "Suppose prices were to






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


change, so that a glass of orange juice, ready to serve, would cost
the same in all of the above forms (forms used during past year)
-would you still use all of them?" Four hundred thirty-five of
the 474 homemakers using more than one form of orange juice
replied to the question. Fifty-eight percent of the white and 78
percent of the colored homemakers said they would still use all
orange products.
There was considerable variation between forms of juice, and
between colored and white users of a given form, in the pro-
portions who would continue use under the price condition
postulated. The equal cost situation would tend to discourage
consumption of orangeade, canned orange juice and hot-pack
orange concentrate most in white households. Fifty-one, 46
and 44 percent, respectively, of current users of more than one
product would discontinue use of these products.
Consumption in colored households would be less affected by
the equal cost situation, and the products affected most would
be different. The greatest decline would be in frozen orange
concentrate, with 34 percent of the current colored users dis-
continuing its use. Twenty-one percent would discontinue can-
ned juice and 19 percent would discontinue the hot-pack concen-
trate. In both white and colored households consumption of
fresh oranges would be reduced least. Eighty-six percent of the
white and 94 percent of the colored homemakers would continue
to use fresh oranges. The number two product, in terms of
proportion of families continuing use, would be frozen orange
concentrate in the white and orangeade in the colored households.
The assumption of equal cost for the various forms of orange
juice eliminates price as an element in the consumers' delibera-
tions as to which orange products are used. An attempt was
made to determine why varying proportions of homemakers,
under conditions of equal cost, would tend to continue to use
some products and discontinue others. Those persons who said
they would not continue to use all products were asked why they
would continue the use of those retained.
Fresh oranges and frozen orange concentrate were the only
two products mentioned by enough persons to make this analy-
sis possible. "Better taste-just no substitute", was given as a
reason for retaining fresh oranges by almost 100 percent of the
white respondents. About 30 percent thought oranges were
more healthful. Colored homemakers attached less importance
to taste and more to health, but these were still the most im-






Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


portant reasons given for continuing use of fresh oranges.
Fifty percent of the white homemakers preferred frozen orange
concentrate because of its taste, while one-third indicated con-
venience as the reason for continuing its use.
PRODUCTS SUBSTITUTED FOR FRESH GRAPEFRUIT
The substitutes for fresh grapefruit were determined under
only one set of conditions-the seasons when grapefruit con-
sumption was at a low level. About three-fourths of the home-
makers who varied the consumption of grapefruit seasonally
said they used some other product at those seasons when little
grapefruit was served.
A wide variety of products was used. Fresh non-citrus fruits
in season and canned grapefruit juice mentioned by 37 and 28
percent,"2 respectively, were the most popular substitutes among
white respondents. In colored households canned grapefruit
juice was the most important substitute, being mentioned by 44
percent of the interviewees. Many other products were men-
tioned by colored homemakers but by very small numbers.30
The other products mentioned by white and colored inter-
viewees were other citrus juices, other fresh citrus fruits, juices
(kind not specified), citrus sections, non-citrus juices and soft
drinks. Soft drinks were mentioned by 11 percent of the colored
but by none of the white respondents. Frozen grapefruit con-
centrate was indicated as a substitute for fresh grapefruit by
only one homemaker. The impact of frozen grapefruit concen-
trate on the sale of other grapefruit products appears almost
negligible when compared with that of frozen orange concen-
trate on other orange products.
PRODUCTS SUBSTITUTED FOR CANNED GRAPEFRUIT JUICE
One indication of the products substituted for canned grape-
fruit juice was obtained. Approximately 200 white and 100
colored homemakers, who had used canned grapefruit juice at
some time during the year but were not using it the week prior
to the interview, were asked the reasons for their current non-
use. Use of some other product was prominent among the rea-
sons mentioned.
Only two substitutes or groups of substitutes were mentioned
Of those persons who varied consumption seasonally and used some
other product instead.
Only 27 colored families who varied consumption seasonally substi-
tuted some other product.






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


by any appreciable proportion of the respondents-other citrus
juices and fresh grapefruit. Thirty-one percent of the white
and 19 percent of the colored homemakers gave the use of some
other citrus juice as the reason for current non-use of canned
grapefruit juice. The use of fresh grapefruit was given as the
reason for non-use by 22 percent of the white and 16 percent of
the colored homemakers. Fresh non-citrus fruits, prominent as
substitutes for fresh grapefruit, and fresh citrus fruits were not
mentioned as substitutes for canned grapefruit juice. Non-
citrus juices were mentioned by very few homemakers.
GENERAL COMMENTS ON SUBSTITUTION
The products substituted for a given citrus product, or pro-
ducts, vary with circumstances-such as availability of possible
substitutes, season of the year, and conditions in the retail store,
such as appearance of fresh fruit and prices. Whether or not
substitution for fresh citrus fruits, in season, takes place may
well be determined by the appearance of fresh citrus relative to
other fresh fruits in the store.
To promote maximum total sales of citrus products, it would
appear desirable for the citrus industry to employ the knowl-
edge of acceptable substitutes and conditions under which substi-
tution takes place to do such things as: (1) time advertising of
a given citrus product to coincide with the period when competi-
tion from non-citrus products is heaviest; (2) promote merchan-
dising programs designed to maintain appearance and quality
of fresh citrus relative to other fresh fruits; and (3) since fresh
citrus seems to be the preferred form in many households, to
keep advertising of processed forms to a minimum while fresh
fruit is in season.

ATTITUDE TOWARD, KNOWLEDGE OF, AND SOURCES OF
INFORMATION ABOUT CITRUS PRODUCTS
Industry effort has been directed toward convincing people
that citrus products are necessary or desirable in the diet. Some
measure of the success of these efforts is given by the proportion
of homemakers who feel that citrus products are essential or
desirable. To obtain such a measure, all respondents were
asked, "Do you think that adults just have to eat some kind of
fresh, frozen or canned citrus fruits to be healthy?" Those who
replied in the negative were asked, "Although you don't think
adults just have to eat some kind of citrus fruits, do you think







Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi 49

it is a good idea for them to eat some ?" Homemakers in house-
holds in which children were present were asked the same ques-
tions with respect to use of citrus products by children.
Relatively more homemakers considered citrus products es-
sential for children than considered them essential for adults.
Seventy-four percent of the white and 79 percent of the colored
homemakers, in households with children, said they thought
children just had to eat citrus products. In contrast, only about
61 percent of both white and colored homemakers thought citrus
products were essential for adults. Between 85 and 93 percent
of all homemakers who did not think citrus was essential thought
it was a desirable part of the diet of both children and adults.

TABLE 9.-PROPORTIONS OF HOMEMAKERS REPORTING VARIOUS REASONS
FOR FEELING OF ESSENTIALNESS OR DESIRABILITY OF CITRUS PRODUCTS IN
THE DIET, 374 WHITE AND 194 COLORED HOMEMAKERS,* MERIDIAN, MIS-
SISSIPPI, MARCH-APRIL 1951.

Reason Homemakers Reporting
White I Colored
(percent)

Vitamins ........ .................... ... ....... 56 30
Vitamins, no particular one specified ... 32 26
Vitam in C ........... .......... ... 19 3
"Sunshine" vitam in ................... ............. 4 1
Vitam in D .................... .................. 1
Just good for you .................. .................... 20 20
A id elim nation ............................................ 13 10
Help cure or prevent colds ........ ............... 9 11
Stimulate appetite ......................................... 9 6
Provide body with necessary acid ............. 8 1
Doctor recommends ..........-- ...-.-. .....----....- 6 5
Provide minerals ................. ....--......-- ---. 6 5
Counteract acid condition ....................-- 4
Aid in reducing ...-.- ....-.. .... 2 1
Build bones ...-...- ........... -- 2 4
Build blood .......... ... ........ .............. 1 2
Other reasons ...........................-- ....---- ------. 17 32

A total of 395 white and 206 colored homemakers thought citrus products were
essential or desirable but only the above numbers reported reasons for their feelings. Each
homemaker had an opportunity to report more than one reason.

Reasons given for the feeling of essentialness or desirability
of citrus products revealed that homemakers attributed a variety
of health-giving properties to citrus products. Just over half
the white and less than one-third of the colored homemakers,
however, recognized that citrus products were important for
their vitamin content (Table 9). Relatively few knew what






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


particular vitamin was most abundant in citrus products. About
a fifth of the respondents could not explain their feelings about
citrus products except to say, "They're just good for you". Many
health-giving properties-among which were helping cure and
prevent colds, building blood and bones and aiding elimination-
were attributed to citrus products.
Homemakers 31 learned about the value of citrus products from
a number of sources. Schools, reported by about half of both
white and colored respondents, were the most important source
of information. The second largest group of homemakers learned
about the value of citrus from doctors or nurses. Many home-
makers could not indicate specifically where they learned about
the value of citrus products but gave such answers as-"just
always thought or knew", "learned from experience", or "learned
at home".
In view of the lack of knowledge and the amount of misinfor-
mation about citrus products, it would appear to be a worthwhile
service and good publicity for the citrus industry to devote more
effort to publicizing the health values of citrus products in the
diet. The public schools and the medical profession appear to
be among the best media for the purpose.
An effort was made to determine where homemakers found
out about new citrus products, and about new ways of serving
established products. The interviewees were asked whether they
had used any new products during the past year; and whether
they had served any previously used products in a new way.
Those who replied in the affirmative were asked what the new
products or new ways were, and the sources of information about
them.
Just over one-sixth of the homemakers reported using some
citrus product for the first time in the year preceding the inter-
view. Frozen orange concentrate was the product mentioned by
about half of the homemakers. Orangeade was reported by a
fifth, while such products as the other frozen and hot-pack con-
centrates were mentioned by a half a dozen or less respondents.
Homemakers usually learned about the new product in one of two
ways-they just saw it in the store, or their neighbors, friends
or relatives told them about it. Magazines, newspapers and the
radio were seldom mentioned as a source of information.
A very small number-25 of the white and 14 of the colored--

1 Those homemakers who remembered the source of information.






Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


respondents said they had served an established product in some
new way during the past year. The number of responses was
too small to permit any generalization as to the sources of infor-
mation.

NOTES ON THE USE OF MINOR CITRUS PRODUCTS

Many citrus products were used in such small numbers of
households as to preclude any detailed analysis of their use. An
attempt was made to determine some of the causes for limited
use of these products. All homemakers who had reported use
of the products at some time during the year, but were not
using them in the week prior to interview, were asked the rea-
sons for current non-use. The products included in this group
were grapefruit and blended frozen concentrates; canned orange,
grapefruit and mixed sections; canned tangerine and blended
juices; and hot-pack orange and grapefruit concentrates.
For all products except tangerine juice, canned orange sections
and hot-pack orange concentrate, "use of some other product
instead" was the most frequently given reason for current non-
use. Dislike of the product, as indicated by the answers "just
don't like" or "used only once or twice", was most prominent in
explaining non-use of canned tangerine juice and orange sec-
tions, and was almost as important as use of some other product
in explaining non-use of canned blended juice. A third reason
given frequently was "just didn't think about it, or haven't
wanted any". Non-use of canned sections was partially ex-
plained by the fact that they were used in salads served infre-
quently.
Fresh tangerines and satsumas were considered as minor pro-
ducts, not due to limited use but rather because of limited
production as compared with oranges and grapefruit. For this
reason a limited amount of information was obtained with re-
spect to their use. Three phenomena were studied: (1) the
ability to distinguish between tangerines and satsumas; (2) the
time of year when tangerines and satsumas were used; and (3)
members of the family for whom tangerines and satsumas are
bought.
A relatively small proportion-approximately one-third-of
the respondents who said they had used either tangerines or
satsumas were aware of the existence of a difference between
them. There appeared to be a tendency among both homemakers






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


and grocers to use the terms tangerine and satsuma interchange-
ably in describing a fruit which might be either one.
Tangerines or satsumas were served in the largest proportion
of households during the Christmas season only. Such serving
was reported by 31 percent of the homemakers. About one-fifth
of the homemakers served tangerines and satsumas any time
they were available. Other homemakers said they served these
fruits during the winter or in some combination of seasons in-
cluding winter.
Relatively few of the homemakers in households containing
children purchased tangerines and satsumas exclusively for the
children. This, however, was the practice in 9 percent of the
white and 24 percent of the colored households.


SUMMARY

Some kind of citrus product is used, and considered desirable
in the diet, by a large proportion of homemakers. Fresh citrus
and canned juices are so widely known and used that extensive
commodity advertising of these products is likely to be less ef-
fective than that devoted to less well-known products.
A large proportion of the users of major citrus products have
specific preferences with respect to these products. However,
the preferences are not usually strong enough to preclude pur-
chase of products similar to the preferred product when the pre-
ferred product is not available.
Most users of fresh oranges prefer sweeter oranges than those
normally found on the market. Most users of fresh grapefruit
prefer them pink in color and without seeds. From one-half to
three-quarters of the homemakers prefer specific brands of pro-
cessed products, but only one-fourth to one-third of the home-
makers feel so strongly about their preference that they do not
buy other brands. There is little evidence of consumer famili-
arity with varieties, or brands, of fresh oranges; nor do any
large number of homemakers care in what state fresh oranges
were grown.
The major citrus products, both fresh and processed, are
served by few homemakers except at breakfast or between meals.
Advertising might more effectively promote increased consump-
tion if directed toward inducing the homemakers to serve citrus
products in more varied forms and more frequently in the family
diet.







Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi


Three-fourths of the white and two-thirds of the colored house-
holds studied will substitute apples, bananas or other fresh fruit
for fresh citrus fruits. Quality, appearance, price and avail-
ability of fresh fruits are important factors which influence
homemakers to buy substitutes.
Tomato juice is the most important substitute for citrus juice
by white households and pineapple juice by colored households.
About one-third of the homemakers who have used both fresh
oranges and frozen orange concentrate use fewer oranges since
they began using orange concentrate. Approximately half of the
homemakers who have used both canned orange juice and frozen
concentrate say they are using less, or have discontinued the use
of, canned orange juice.
More than one form of orange juice is served by a large pro-
portion of homemakers. Desire for a change, convenience of
certain forms and relative prices are the most prominent reasons
for use of several forms.
Many homemakers are not particularly well-informed as to the
reasons citrus products are of value in the diet. About half of
the white, but only one-third of the colored, homemakers know
citrus products are important for vitamin content. Homemakers
hold a variety of beliefs, many of which are erroneous, as to the
health-giving qualities of citrus. The public schools and the
medical profession appear to be among the best media for publi-
cizing the health values of citrus fruits.



A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RECENT
RESEARCH STUDIES AND STATISTICAL REPORTS ON
CITRUS MARKETING 2

I. RESEARCH STUDIES

1. DOWNIE, E. D., and H. R. TREINISH. Consumer buying practices and
preferences for purchasing oranges by weight or count in selected
cities. U. S. Prod. and Mktg. Admin. (Processed). 1950.
2. FUGETT, KENNETH A., JAMES A. BAYTON and H. WAYNE BITTING.
Citrus preferences among customers of selected stores. Tex. Agr.
Exp. Sta. Bul. 722. 1950.
3. GARDNER, KELSEY B., and A. W. McKAY. The California Fruit Growers
Exchange system. U. S. Farm Credit Admin. Cir. C-135. 1950.

3" Prepared by Cecil N. Smith. Associate Agricultural Economist, Florida Agricultural
Experiment Stations.







54 Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations

4. GODWIN, MARSHALL R. Consumer response to varying prices for
Florida oranges. Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 508. 1952.

5. GOLDSBOROUGH, GEORGE H. Working together to market Florida citrus
fruit. U. S. Farm Credit Admin. Cir. C-141. 1951.

6. HOOFNAGLE, WILLIAM S. Factors affecting the annual auction price
of Florida oranges, 1930-51. U. S. Bur. Agr. Economics (Processed).
1952.

7. Factors affecting the weighted average auction price
of Florida grapefruit, 1930-51. U. S. Bur. Agr. Economics (Pro-
cessed). 1952.

8. Price relations between methods of sale of Florida
Valencia oranges. U. S. Bur. Agr. Economics (Processed). 1951.

9. Hoos, SIDNEY, and J. N. BOLES. Orange and orange products-chang-
ing economic relationships. Calif. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 731. 1952.

10. JOHNSON, DEHARD B. Effects of size of fruit on price of Florida
oranges, New York and St. Louis auction markets, 1949-50 season.
U. S. Bur. Agr. Economics (Processed). 1951.

11. KIGER, HUGH C. Application of industry-wide marketing associations
and programs to the Florida citrus industry. U. S. Farm Credit
Admin. Spec. Report 242. 1952.

12. OGREN, KENNETH E. An analysis of household purchases of citrus
products by 500 urban families, November 1948 October 1949.
U. S. Bur. Agr. Economics (Processed). 1951.

13. POWELL, LEVI A., SR. The interrelationship of prices and quantities
of citrus products purchased in Jacksonville, Florida, 1949-50
season. Unpublished Master's Thesis, University of Florida. 1951.

14. STRICKLAND, J. C. Fresh fruit survey. Florida Citrus Mutual, Lake-
land, Fla. 1951.

15. TROTTER, WARREN K. An analysis of citrus and competing products
in different segments of the Memphis market. Unpublished Master's
Thesis, University of Florida. 1952.

16. U. S. Bur. Agr. Economics. Citrus fruit during World War II. (Agr.
Monograph 3.) 1950.

17. Citrus preferences among household consumers in Louis-
ville and in Nelson County, Kentucky. (Agri. Info. Bul. No. 2).
1950.

18. Consumers' use of and opinions about citrus products.
(Agr. Info. Bul. No. 50). 1951.

19. -. Readjustments in processing and marketing citrus
fruits. (Processed). 1946.







Use of Citrus Products in Meridian, Mississippi 55

II. STATISTICAL REPORTS

A. DAILY CITRUS MARKET REPORTS

1. U. S. Prod. and Mktg. Admin., Lakeland, Fla. (October 1- June 15).

2. Los Angeles, Calif. (Year round).

3. Weslaco, Tex. (October 15 May 31).


B. QUARTERLY REPORTS

1. U. S. Bur. Agr. Economics. Consumer Fruit and Juice Purchases.
2. --. The Fruit Situation.


C. SEMI-ANNUAL REPORTS

1. U. S. Prod. and Mktg. Admin. Availability of Fresh Citrus Fruits,
Canned and Frozen Juices, and Dried Fruit in Retail Stores.


D. ANNUAL REPORTS

1. Florida Citrus Mutual, Lakeland. Annual Statistical Report, --
Season.

2. Florida State Marketing Bureau, Jacksonville. Annual Fruit and
Vegetable Report-Production, Transportation and Marketing An-
alysis.

3. Growers' Administrative Committee and Shippers' Advisory Commit-
tee, Lakeland. Report of Marketing Policies Adopted by the Ship-
pers' Advisory Committee and the Growers' Administrative Com-
mittee for the Shipping Season for Oranges, Grapefruit and
Tangerines.

4. U. S. Bur. Agr. Economics. Citrus Fruits-Production, Farm Dis-
position, Value and Utilization of Sales, Crop Seasons....and.....(for
past two seasons).
5. Consumer Buying Practices for Selected Fresh Fruits,
Canned and Frozen Juices and Dried Fruits, Related to Family
Characteristics, Region and City Size.
6. USDA, BAE, Crop Reporting Service, Orlando, Fla. (in cooperation
with Florida Citrus Commission, Florida Department of Agricul-
ture, and Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service). Florida
Citrus Fruits-Annual Summary.

7. U. S. Dept of Agri. Agricultural Statistics.

8. U. S. Prod. and Mktg. Admin. Wholesale Prices of Fruits and Vege-
tables at New York, Chicago, and Leading Shipping Points.







56 Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations

E. OTHER REPORTS

1. U. S. Bur. Agr. Economics. Citrus Fruits-Production, Farm Dis-
position, Value and Utilization of Sales, Crop Seasons 1944-45 -
1949-50. 1952.

2. -. Citrus Prices-Supplement No. 3 to Agricultural Prices,
November 1952.

3. Fruits and Nuts, Bearing Acreage, 1919-1946. (CS-
32). 1949.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs