International Journal ofEnvironmental Researchand Public Health

ArticleAssociations of Cooking Skill with Social Relationships andSocial Capital among Older Men and Women in Japan: Resultsfrom the JAGES
Yukako Tani 1, * , Takeo Fujiwara 1
1

2

3

*

Citation: Tani, Y.; Fujiwara, T.;

and Katsunori Kondo 2,3

Department of Global Health Promotion, Tokyo Medical and Dental University (TMDU), 1-5-45, Yushima,
Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8519, Japan
Department of Social Preventive Medical Sciences, Center for Preventive Medical Sciences, Chiba University,
1-8-1 Inohana, Chuo-ku, Chiba-shi 260-8672, Japan
Department of Gerontological Evaluation, Center for Gerontology and Social Science, National Center for
Geriatrics and Gerontology, 7-430 Morikoka-cho, Obu-shi 474-8511, Japan
Correspondence: tani.hlth@tmd.ac.jp; Tel.: +81-3-5803-5189

Abstract: The health benefits of social relationships and social capital are well known. However,
little research has examined the determinants of social relationships and social capital. We examined
whether cooking skill was associated with social relationships and social capital in older Japanesepeople. We used 2016 Japan Gerontological Evaluation Study data on a population-based sample
of men and women aged ≥ 65 years (n = 21,061). Cooking skill was assessed using a scale withgood validity. Social relationships were evaluated by assessing neighborhood ties, frequency andnumber of meetings with friends, and frequent meals with friends. Individual-level social capital
was evaluated by assessing civic participation, social cohesion, and reciprocity. Among women,
high-level cooking skill was positively associated with all components of social relationships andsocial capital. Women with high-level cooking skill were 2.27 times (95% CI: 1.77–2.91) more likely
to have high levels of neighborhood ties and 1.65 (95% CI: 1.20–2.27) times more likely to eat withfriends, compared with those with middle/low-level cooking skill. Cooking skills explained 26.2% of
the gender difference in social relationships. Improving cooking skills may be key to boosting social
relationships and social capital, which would prevent social isolation.

Kondo, K. Associations of Cooking
Skill with Social Relationships andKeywords: cooking skill; social relationship; social capital; older adults

Social Capital among Older Men and
Women in Japan: Results from the
JAGES. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public
Health 2023, 20, 4633. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20054633
Academic Editor: Paul B. Tchounwou
Received: 9 February 2023
Revised: 3 March 2023
Accepted: 5 March 2023
Published: 6 March 2023

Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms andconditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

1. Introduction
Globally, there were 901 million people aged 60 years or older in 2015, and this number
is projected to rise to 1.4 billion by 2030 [1]. In older age, social networks may decline
because of retirement, adult children’s independence, and bereavement after the deathof spouses or friends. Socially isolated older people are at increased risk of several detrimental health outcomes including mortality [2], dementia [3], and poor mental health [4].
Therefore, it is important to find modifiable factors that foster social relationships amongolder adults.
Social relationships are measured in a variety of ways, with three main aspects being
used in research on health: social network, social activity, and social support [5]. Social
networks and social activity represent structural aspects of social relationships, whereassocial support represents functional aspects of social relationships [5]. Social network
covers network size (number of members) and density (frequency of contact between
members), social activities are represented by social participation and social engagement,
and social support refers to a perception of the availability of support from members of thesocial network [5]. In addition to social relationships, social capital is another important
health-promoting concept. Social capital is described as resources that people can receive

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4633. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20054633

https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4633

2 of 10through their social networks, although there is no universally agreed definition of social
capital [6,7].
The health benefits of both Individual- and community-level social capital have beenshown in many epidemiological studies [6–9]. However, little research has examinedthe determinants of social capital. Recently, gender inequality in social capital has beenreported, with women having higher levels of some social capital components, such as
reciprocity and bridging, compared with men [10,11]. Compared with men, women tend toinvest more in social relationships and building intimate emotional relationships [12,13]. Ina study of older adults in Japan and England, women more often met with friends than didmen [14,15]. However, the reasons for differences in social relationships between men andwomen are still unknown. In addition to gender, ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES)
have been reported as possible determinants of social capital [10,11,16], but these factors(i.e., gender, ethnicity, and SES) are difficult or impossible to modify through intervention.
To boost social capital, modifiable factors determining social relationships and social capitalshould be identified.
Activity-related food has been linked with social activity from an evolutionary perspective [17]. Meal preparation ability may contribute to fostering not only family relationships
but also social relationships with neighbors and friends. A qualitative study among rural
older adults in the United States reported that most older adults gave or received somekind of food, especially cooked foods and garden products, and women were more likely
to receive food gifts than men [18]. This food sharing was valued as a way to maintainreciprocity in social relations and to create a feeling of community membership [18]. In
Japan, there is a culture of osusowake, which refers to the mutual exchange of foodstuffs
between neighbors. This culture may contribute to strengthening community networks
through supporting cultural activities including local festivals and seasonal events [19]. A
systematic report on the benefits of cooking interventions showed that community kitchen
programs had a positive influence on socialization [20]. Higher levels of cooking skills havebeen found to increase the frequency of cooking and confidence in cooking [21–25]. Thus,
cooking skill may increase opportunities to build better social relationships with others,
such as sharing food with neighbors and attending local cultural activities.
Cooking skills represent a basic living ability that contributes to better diet quality. Several studies have shown the dietary benefits of cooking skills, such as higher consumptionof vegetables and fruits and lower consumption of prepared meals, convenience foods, andultra-processed foods [21,25–27]. However, little is known about the importance of cooking
skills beyond dietary outcomes. Although one’s mother is the most common source forlearning cooking skills, people also learn from partners, cookbooks, television shows, andcooking classes [23,28]. Thus, interventions are possible even in older age. In fact, because
retirement allows more time to cook, it is reasonable for older people to newly start to learn
cooking skills.
The aim of this study was to examine the associations of cooking skills with social
relationships and social capital among older adults. First, to identify social relationshipsthat can be modified through intervention, we examined the association of cooking skills
with social relationships with neighbors and friends rather than with relatives. Specifically,
the investigated social relationships included neighborhood ties, frequency of meetings
with friends, number of meetings with friends, and shared meals with friends. Next, we
examined the associations between cooking skills and individual-level social capital, which
included civic participation, social cohesion, and reciprocity [29]. Finally, we examinedgender differences in social relationships and social capital, as well as the mediating role ofcooking skills in the associations of gender with social relationships and social capital.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design and Participants
We used data from the Japan Gerontological Evaluation Study (JAGES), which was
carried out in 39 municipalities across Japan in 2016. The study targeted community-

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4633

3 of 10dwelling older adults without functional disabilities, defined as not being certified as
eligible to receive long-term public care insurance system services [30]. From October 2016
to January 2017, self-report questionnaires were mailed to 279,661 adults aged ≥ 65 years,
and 196,438 individuals returned the questionnaire (response rate: 70.2%). The survey
was conducted using random sampling in 22 large municipalities and was administered
to all eligible residents in 17 small municipalities [25]. One-eighth of the target sample(n = 22,219) were randomly selected to receive the survey module inquiring about cooking
skills. Of the 21,061 participants who had information on both gender and cooking skills
and did not report any limitations in activities of daily living, those who had information
on each outcome variable were included in the analysis; thus, the analytic sample differs
depending on the outcome: n = 20,799 for neighborhood ties, n = 20,477 for frequency of
meetings with friends, n = 20,445 for the number of meetings with friends, n = 21,061 forshared meals with friends, n = 15,631 for civic participation, n = 20,424 for social cohesion,and n = 20,224 for reciprocity. Participants were informed that participation in the study
was voluntary and that completing and returning the questionnaire indicated their consent
to participate in the study.
2.2. Social Relationships
Neighborhood ties, frequency of meetings with friends, number of meetings withfriends, and frequent shared meals with friends were evaluated to assess social relationships.
All components of social relationships were assessed using the self-report questionnaire. Forneighborhood ties, participants were asked, “What kind of interactions do you have withpeople in your neighborhood?” The four response options were (1) mutual consultation,
lending and borrowing daily commodities, and cooperation in daily life; (2) standing andchatting frequently; (3) no more than exchanging greetings; and (4) none, not even greetings [29,31]. We classified the participants as having high (response 1), middle (response2), or low (response 3 or response 4) levels of ties, collapsing the two response categories
because only 2.27% of the participants reported having no interactions with people in theirneighborhood (response 4). The frequency of meetings with friends was assessed using
the following question: “How often do you see your friends?”. The six response options
were (1) ≥4 times/week; (2) 2–3 times/week; (3) 1 time/week; (4) 1–3 times/month; (5) afew times/year; (6) never [29]. In this analysis, the scores of 4, 2.5, 1, 0.5, 0.125, and 0(times/week) were assigned to response categories 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, respectively, and theresulting variable was treated as continuous. The number of meetings with friends wasassessed using the following question: “How many friends/acquaintances have you seen
over the past month?”. The five response options were (1) ≥10; (2) 6–9; (3) 3–5; (4) 1–2;
(5) 0 [29]. In this analysis, the scores of 10, 7.5, 4, 1.5, and 0 (persons/month) were assigned
to responses 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively, and the resulting variable was treated as continuous. Frequent shared meals with friends were assessed using the following question:“Who do you usually have meals with?”. The possible responses were no one, spouse,children, grandchildren, friends, and other [32]. Multiple responses were possible. We
defined participants who selected “friends” as eating with friends.
2.3. Social Capital
Individual-level social capital was evaluated by assessing civic participation, social
cohesion, and reciprocity using a validated scale to measure community-level social capital [29]. These variables were assessed using the self-report questionnaire, and details of
this assessment have been described elsewhere [29]. For civic participation, we calculated
the number of groups in which a respondent participated once or more [29]. Social cohesion
was assessed using the following questions: “Do you think people living in your area canbe trusted in general?” (community trust), “Do you think most people in your community
offer assistance to others?” (norm of reciprocity), and “How strong is your residential place
attachment?” (community attachment). Responses were rated on a five-point scale ranging
from strongly trusted, agree strongly, or strongly attached to not at all. We calculated theInt. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4633

4 of 10

number of items on which the participant strongly or moderately agreed [29]. Reciprocity
was assessed using the following questions: “Do you have someone who listens to yourconcerns and complaints?” (received emotional support), “Do you listen to someone’s
concerns and complaints?” (provided emotional support), and “Do you have someone wholooks after you when you are sick for a few days?” (received instrumental support). The
possible responses were no one, spouse, children, sibling/relative/parent/grandchildren,neighbors, friends, and other. Multiple responses were allowed. To explore the type ofreciprocity that can be changed through intervention, we calculated the number of items
for which the respondent selected neighbors, friends, or other.
2.4. Cooking Skills
Cooking skills were assessed using a cooking skills scale designed with consideration of basic Japanese cooking methods and typical meals; details of this assessment
have been described elsewhere [25]. This scale had appropriate internal consistency(Cronbach’s α = 0.96) and notable discriminant validity, with women (experienced foodpreparers) scoring significantly better than men (food preparation novices) [25]. The scaleconsisted of seven items: (1) overall cooking skills; (2) able to peel fruits and vegetables;(3) able to boil eggs and vegetables; (4) able to grill fish; (5) able to make stir-fried meat andvegetables; (6) able to make miso soup; and (7) able to make stewed dishes. Participants
were asked to evaluate their own cooking skills on a six-point scale ranging from unable(=0) to very well (=5). We calculated the mean of these seven items and divided the result
into three categories: high (score of >4.0), middle (score of 2.1–4.0), and low (score of≤2.0) [25]. For women, the middle group and the low group were combined into one
category because the low group was quite small (1.2%).
2.5. Covariates
Covariates were assessed using the self-report questionnaire (Table S1). We included
education, current annual household income, and marital status as socio-demographic
characteristics [25]. For health status, we asked whether the participants were currently
under medical treatment for any of the following conditions: cancer, heart disease, stroke,
hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and hyperlipidemia. Furthermore, depressive symptoms
were assessed using the Geriatric Depression Scale [33]. To account for personality aspects such as curiosity regarding cooking, which may be directly associated with social
relationships, as a sensitivity analysis, we controlled for whether the participants talked
with young people [34] and the participants’ willingness to take on a leadership role in
a community activity. Participants with missing data on covariates were included in theanalysis as dummy variables.
2.6. Statistical Analysis
The analyses were stratified by gender because different associations between cooking
skills and dietary behaviors have been reported for men and women [25]. First, after
stratifying the sample by gender, we tested the differences using the chi-square test for
categorical variables and the t-test or ANOVA for continuous variables. Next, participants
were stratified by their level of cooking skills, and differences were tested using the chisquare test for categorical variables and the t-test or ANOVA for continuous variables.
Second, for neighborhood ties, we used multinomial logistic regression to calculate adjusted
relative risk ratios (RRRs) with 95% CIs of high-level and middle-level ties, with lowlevel ties as the reference category. For the frequency and number of meetings withfriends and social capital (civic participation, social cohesion, and reciprocity), we used
multivariate linear regression models, adjusting for potential confounders. For frequentshared meals with friends, we used logistic regression to calculate adjusted odds ratioswith 95% CIs of eating meals with friends. The models were adjusted for the following
potential confounding factors: age, socio-demographic characteristics (education, annual
normalized household income, and marital status), and health status (medical treatment of

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4633

5 of 10cancer, heart disease, stroke, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and hyperlipidemia, as well
as depressive symptoms).
Additionally, we conducted structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis to explore
the mediating role of cooking skills in the associations of gender with social relationships
and social capital. In the SEM analysis, social relationships and social capital were treatedas latent variables estimated from neighborhood ties, frequency of meetings with friends,
number of meetings with friends, frequent shared meals with friends, civic participation,and reciprocity (n = 15,207 because of missing values on the variables used to estimate thelatent variables). Cooking skill, operationalized as the mean value of the seven cooking
skill items, was treated as a continuous variable. Overall model fit was tested using thecomparative fit index, the root mean square error of approximation, and the standardized
root mean square residual. All analyses were conducted using Stata, Version 15 (Stata
Statistical Software: Release 15. College Station, TX, USA: StataCorp LP).
3. Results
The participants’ characteristics are summarized in Table S1. Women were about twice
as likely as men to have a high level of neighborhood ties and to eat with their friends.
The associations between cooking skills and social relationships are shown in Table 1.
The interaction effect between cooking skills and gender was significant: the relationships
with all components of social relationships were higher among women than among men(p < 0.05 for the interaction). Women with a high level of cooking skills were 2.27 times (95%
CI: 1.77–2.91) more likely to have a high level of neighborhood ties and 1.65 (95% CI: 1.20–2.27)
times more likely to eat with friends, compared with women with middle/low-levelcooking skills. High-level cooking skill was associated with a higher frequency and numberof meetings with friends. Men with high-level cooking skills were 1.84 times (95% CI:
1.46–2.33) more likely to have a high level of neighborhood ties, compared with men with
low-level cooking skills. For men, high-level cooking skill was associated with a higher
frequency and number of meetings with friends. These associations remained significant
after adjusting for prosocial behavior-related personality (Table S2).
Table 1. Associations of cooking skill with neighborhood ties, frequent meals with friends, andfrequency and number of meetings with friends among older adults in Japan.
Neighborhood Ties
(Ref = Low-Level Ties)

Women
Cooking skill
Middle/Low
High
Men
Cooking skill
Low
MiddleHigh

Frequent Meals
with Friends

Frequency of
Meetings with
Friends (n/week)

Number of
Meetings with
Friends (n/week)

Middle-Level Ties
RRR (95% CI)

High-Level Ties
RRR (95% CI)

OR (95% CI)

Coefficient (95% CI)

Coefficient (95% CI)ref1.83 (1.53 to 2.20)

ref2.27 (1.77 to 2.91)

ref1.65 (1.20 to 2.27)

ref0.39 (0.28 to 0.50)

ref1.35 (1.08 to 1.63)

ref1.22 (1.06 to 1.41)
1.34 (1.17 to 1.55)

ref1.41 (1.10 to 1.80)
1.84 (1.46 to 2.33)

ref1.06 (0.73 to 1.54)
1.13 (0.79 to 1.62)

ref0.12 (0.03 to 0.22)
0.22 (0.13 to 0.31)

ref0.45 (0.20 to 0.70)
0.60 (0.37 to 0.84)

CI = confidence interval; OR = odds ratio; ref = reference group; RRR = relative risk ratio; SD = standard
deviation. Boldface indicates statistical significance (p < 0.05). These models adjusted for age, education,
annual normalized household income, marital status, and health status (cancer, heart disease, stroke, diabetes,
hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and depressive symptoms).

The associations between cooking skills and social capital are shown in Table 2. Theinteraction effect between cooking skills and gender was significant (p < 0.05 for the interaction). For women, high-level cooking skill was positively associated with all components ofsocial capital, whereas the relationship between high-level cooking skill and social cohesion
was non-significant for men. These associations remained significant after adjusting for
prosocial behavior-related personality (Table S3).

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4633

6 of 10

Table 2. Results of regression analyses of social capital according to the level of cooking skill amongolder adults in Japan.
Civic Participation

Social Cohesion

Reciprocity

0–5
Coefficient (95% CI)

0–3
Coefficient (95% CI)

0–3
Coefficient (95% CI)

Middle/Low
High

ref
0.24 (0.12 to 0.35)

ref0.11 (0.02 to 0.19)

ref0.28 (0.20 to 0.36)

Low
MiddleHighref0.13 (0.05 to 0.21)
0.18 (0.10 to 0.26)

ref0.01 (−0.06 to 0.08)
0.01 (−0.06 to 0.07)

ref0.07 (0.01 to 0.14)
0.18 (0.12 to 0.24)

Women
Cooking skill
Men
Cooking skill

CI = confidence interval; ref = reference group. Boldface indicates statistical significance (p < 0.05). These models
adjusted for age, education, annual normalized household income, marital status, and health status (cancer, heartdisease, stroke, diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and depressive symptoms).

Compared with men, women had higher levels of social relationships and social
capital except for social cohesion (Tables S4 and S5). Women were 3.01 times (95% CI:
2.76–3.29) more likely to have a high level of neighborhood ties and 2.47 times (95% CI:
2.20–2.78) more likely to eat with friends, compared with men. Women had a higher
frequency and number of meetings with friends (coefficient = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.30–0.38 andcoefficient = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.57–0.78), more civic participation (coefficient = 0.23, 95% CI:
0.19–0.27), and higher reciprocity (coefficient = 0.11, 95% CI: 0.10–0.13). However, women
also had lower social cohesion compared with their male counterparts (coefficient = −0.04,
95% CI: −0.07 to −0.01).
Figure 1 shows the result of the SEM analysis for the association between genderand social capital including social relationships except for social cohesion. This SEM
analysis demonstrated good model fit (likelihood-ratio test of the model, chi-square = 208.4,
p < 0.001; comparative fit index = 0.991; root mean square error of approximation = 0.03;
standardized root mean square residual = 0.016). The association between gender and social
capital was partially mediated by cooking skill (from gender to cooking skill: standardized
coefficient = 0.570, p < 0.001; from cooking skill to social relationships including social
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, x FOR PEER REVIEW
7 of 10
capital: standardized coefficient = 0.152, p < 0.001). The indirect effect was 26.2% of thetotal effect.
Neighborhood ties

Cooking
skill
0.57

0.15

0.63
0.29

GenderFemale0.24

Socialrelationships/social capitalFrequent meals withfriends

0.42

Frequency of
meetings with friends

0.43

Number of meetings
with friends

0.29

Civic participation

0.81
Reciprocity

Figure1.1.Path
Pathmodel
modelof associationsof gender
with relationshipssocial relationships
andsocialcapital(n =Figureof associationsof gender
with socialand social
capital(n =15,207).
15,207).
Path coefficientswere standardized.
path coefficientswere statisticallysignificant
Path
coefficientswere standardized.
All path All
coefficientswere statisticallysignificant(p < 0.05).(p <0.05). Likelihood-ratio
testmodel,of the model,
chi-squarep <Comparative
0.001; Comparativeindex Root
= 0.991;
Likelihood-ratio
test of thechi-square= 208.4, =p 208.4,< 0.001;
fit indexfit= 0.991;
Root
Mean
SquareError
ofApproximation=
0.03;
Standardized
Root
Mean
SquareResidual
Mean Square Error of Approximation = 0.03; Standardized Root Mean Square Residual = 0.016.= 0.016.

4. Discussion
To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine cooking skills as a modifiable
determinant of social relationships and social capital. We found that, among older adults
in Japan, a high level of cooking skill was positively associated with social relationships

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4633

7 of 10

4. Discussion
To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine cooking skills as a modifiable
determinant of social relationships and social capital. We found that, among older adults
in Japan, a high level of cooking skill was positively associated with social relationships
and social capital, and we identified significant interaction effects between cooking skill
and gender on social relationships and social capital. We confirmed that women had
higher levels of social relationships and social capital than men, and these associations
were partially mediated by cooking skill.
Given that food plays a central role in connecting people in traditional Japaneseculture [35], our results are plausible. Special meals for many rituals and celebrations
throughout the year are handed down in various forms throughout Japan [36]. For events,
people prepare special meals called gyoujisyoku and also hold “after parties” following theevents [35]. Even outside of celebrations, many seasonal events connected with locally
produced foods are held in communities [35]. For these events, people do not only eat
together—they also make meals together, which strengthens friendships and cohesiveness [35]. Therefore, cooking skills are indispensable for these traditional and local events,
and it is conceivable that people with higher levels of cooking skills will have more opportunities to play an important role in the community. We also found significant interaction
effects between cooking skills and gender on social relationships and social capital: womenare more likely to benefit from social relationships through a high level of cooking skills.
This finding may be explained by women cooking more frequently than men [25], creating
more opportunities for women to use their cooking skills.
In line with previous studies [10,15,18], we found that women were more likely thanmen to have strong social relationships and social capital. A nationally representative study
in Ukraine showed that the gender difference in bonding social capital, which corresponds
to the frequency/number of meetings with friends in our study, was explained by age
and income [10]. Using SEM analysis, we found that cooking skill mediated 26% of theassociation between gender and social capital. Therefore, we have newly identified cooking
skills as a factor contributing to explaining the gender differences in social capital.
Among the components of social capital, social cohesion was found to be weakly
associated with cooking skills for women but not for men. In contrast to the other social
relationships and social capital, social cohesion was the only variable that was lower inwomen than in men (Table S5). Social cohesion, which is categorized as cognitive social
capital rather than structural social capital, may have determinants that differ from thoseof other aspects of social relationships. A study conducted in the Netherlands showed thatperceptions that one’s neighborhood is unsafe or unattractive and low SES were associatedwith low social cohesion but not with social networks (e.g., visiting neighbors, asking
neighbors for advice) [37]. A study in the United States showed that neighborhood safety
and SES were positively related to social cohesion [38]. Low-SES groups tend to be more
pessimistic and express more feelings of unsafety and neighborhood problems comparedwith those with higher SES [37,39]. Therefore, neighborhood safety and SES may play key
roles in cognitive social capital.
This study had several limitations. First, common method bias may have occurred because cooking skills, social relationships, and social capital were assessed via the self-reportquestionnaire. To address this common source bias, as a sensitivity analysis, we adjusted
for mental health and prosocial behaviors, which are related to the tendency to respond to
the questions. It would be useful to also collect information from a second person, suchas a family member or experienced food preparer who could evaluate the participants’cooking skills. Second, gender bias may have occurred because men tend to have higher
self-esteem and more positive evaluations of their own abilities than women [40]. Men may
overestimate their own cooking skills and women may underestimate theirs, in which casetheir relationship to social relationships and social capital may lead to underestimation.
Third, there may be unmeasured confounding factors, such as regional characteristics. For
example, in communities where cooking classes and events involving meal preparation

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4633

8 of 10are popular, residents will have more opportunities to build social relationships as wellas improve their cooking skills. Regional characteristics may also influence participants’evaluation of social capital. For example, participants may not feel as engaged in society asmuch as they should if they belong to an active community, and vice versa. In the future,indicators of community characteristics will need to be considered. Forth, because the
JAGES survey study sites were not randomly selected, the generalizability of our findings
to other populations in Japan is limited. Additionally, the cooking skill scale in this study
is limited to Japanese culture. Therefore, the results of the study may be applicable only
within Japan. In the future, cooking skill scales appropriate for each culture will need to be
developed to evaluate aspects of health promotion in other countries. Finally, because thisstudy was cross-sectional, causality could not be established: reverse causation is possible,
and unmeasured factors may confound the examined associations. For example, having a
low level of social relationships with neighbors/friends may reduce the chances of learning
cooking skills, which may lead to poor cooking skills. However, more than half of theadult respondents learned most of their cooking skills from their mothers when they were
teenagers [28].
5. Conclusions
Our study has produced novel findings regarding the associations of cooking skills
with social relationships and social capital. Considering the health benefits of social
relationships and social capital, our study is of great public health importance because it
has demonstrated the importance of cooking skill, a factor that can be modified throughintervention to improve social relationships and social capital.
Supplementary Materials: The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijerph20054633/s1, Table S1: Characteristics of older men andwomen in Japan by level of cooking skill; Table S2: Associations of cooking skill with neighborhoodties, frequent meals with friends, and frequency and number of meetings with friends among older
adults in Japan; Table S3: Results of regression analyses of social capital according to the cooking skill
among older adults in Japan; Table S4: Associations of gender with neighborhood ties, frequent meals
with friends, and frequency and number of meetings with friends among older adults in Japan; Table
S5: Results of regression analyses of social capital according to gender among older adults in Japan.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Y.T.; methodology, Y.T.; formal analysis, Y.T.; investigation,
K.K.; data curation, Y.T.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.T.; writing—review and editing, T.F.,
and K.K.; visualization, Y.T.; supervision, Y.T.; project administration, Y.T.; funding acquisition, Y.T.,
T.F. and K.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research used data from the Japan Gerontological Evaluation Study (JAGES), which
was funded by JSPS (Japan Society for the Promotion of Science) KAKENHI Grant Number (JP15H01972,
16H03276, 19K14029, and 20H00557), a Health Labour Sciences Research Grant (H28-Choju-Ippan002, H30-Junkanki-Ippan-004, 19FA1012, and 19FA2001), grants from the Japan Agency for Medical
Research and Development (JP18dk0110027, JP18ls0110002, JP18le0110009, JP19dk0110034, andJP20dk0110034), Research Funding for Longevity Sciences from the National Center for Geriatrics andGerontology (29–42), and a JST-OPERA program grant (JPMJOP1831). This study was also supported
by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number (22K10578).
Institutional Review Board Statement: The study was conducted in accordance with the Declarationof Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Committee of Research of Human Subjects at the National
Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology (No. 992) and Chiba University Faculty of Medicine (No. 2493).
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement: The datasets generated and analysed during the current study are notpublicly available due to ethical or legal restrictions but are available from the corresponding author
upon reasonable request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4633

9 of 10

References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.

15.

16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.

23.
24.

25.
26.
27.

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs Population Division. World Population Prospects: The 2015 Revision;
United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2014.
Steptoe, A.; Shankar, A.; Demakakos, P.; Wardle, J. Social isolation, loneliness, and all-cause mortality in older men and women.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2013, 110, 5797–5801. [CrossRef]
Livingston, G.; Sommerlad, A.; Orgeta, V.; Costafreda, S.G.; Huntley, J.; Ames, D.; Ballard, C.; Banerjee, S.; Burns, A.; CohenMansfield, J.; et al. Dementia prevention, intervention, and care. Lancet 2017, 390, 2673–2734. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Blazer, D. Social Isolation and Loneliness in Older Adults—A Mental Health/Public Health Challenge. JAMA Psychiatry 2020, 77,
990–991. [CrossRef]
Berkman, L.F.; Glass, T.; Brissette, I.; Seeman, T.E. From social integration to health: Durkheim in the new millennium. Soc. Sci.
Med. 2000, 51, 843–857. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Murayama, H.; Fujiwara, Y.; Kawachi, I. Social Capital and Health: A Review of Prospective Multilevel Studies. J. Epidemiol. 2012,
22, 179–187. [CrossRef]
Moore, S.; Kawachi, I. Twenty years of social capital and health research: A glossary. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2017, 71,
513–517. [CrossRef]
Ehsan, A.; De Silva, M.J. Social capital and common mental disorder: A systematic review. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2015,
69, 1021–1028. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Rodgers, J.; Valuev, A.V.; Hswen, Y.; Subramanian, S. Social capital and physical health: An updated review of the literature for
2007–2018. Soc. Sci. Med. 2019, 236, 112360. [CrossRef]
Karhina, K.; Eriksson, M.; Ghazinour, M.; Ng, N. What determines gender inequalities in social capital in Ukraine? SSM Popul.
Health 2019, 8, 100383. [CrossRef]
Eriksson, M.; Dahlgren, L.; Janlert, U.; Weinehall, L.; Emmelin, M. Social Capital, Gender and Educational Level Impact on
Self-Rated Health. Open Public Health J. 2010, 3, 1–12. [CrossRef]
Kawachi, I.; Berkman, L.F. Social ties and mental health. J. Urban Health 2001, 78, 458–467. [CrossRef]
Leevesa, G.; Herbert, R. Gender differences in social capital investment: Theory and evidence. Econ. Model. 2014, 37, 377–385.
[CrossRef]
Noguchi, T.; Kondo, K.; Saito, M.; Nakagawa-Senda, H.; Suzuki, S. Community social capital and the onset of functional disability
among older adults in Japan: A multilevel longitudinal study using Japan Gerontological Evaluation Study (JAGES) data. BMJ
Open 2019, 9, e029279. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Aida, J.; Cable, N.; Zaninotto, P.; Tsuboya, T.; Tsakos, G.; Matsuyama, Y.; Ito, K.; Osaka, K.; Kondo, K.; Marmot, M.; et al. Social
and Behavioural Determinants of the Difference in Survival among Older Adults in Japan and England. Gerontology 2018, 64,
266–277. [CrossRef]
Barnes-Mauthe, M.; Gray, S.A.; Arita, S.; Lynham, J.; Leung, P. What Determines Social Capital in a Social–Ecological System?
Insights from a Network Perspective. Environ. Manag. 2014, 55, 392–410. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Yamagiwa, J.; Tsubokawa, K.; Inoue, E.; Ando, C. Sharing fruit of Treculia africana among western gorillas in the MoukalabaDoudou National Park, Gabon: Preliminary report. Primates 2014, 56, 3–10. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Quandt, S.; Arcury, T.; Bell, R.; McDonald, J.; Vitolins, M. The social and nutritional meaning of food sharing among older rural
adults. J. Aging Stud. 2001, 15, 145–162. [CrossRef]
Kohsaka, R.; Matsuoka, H.; Uchiyama, Y. Capturing the relationships between local foods and residents: A case in the Notoregion, Japan. J. Ethn. Foods 2016, 3, 86–92. [CrossRef]
Farmer, N.; Touchton-Leonard, K.; Ross, A. Psychosocial Benefits of Cooking Interventions: A Systematic Review. Health Educ.
Behav. Off. Publ. Soc. Public Health Educ. 2018, 45, 167–180. [CrossRef]
Hartmann, C.; Dohle, S.; Siegrist, M. Importance of cooking skills for balanced food choices. Appetite 2013, 65, 125–131. [CrossRef]
McGowan, L.; Pot, G.K.; Stephen, A.M.; Lavelle, F.; Spence, M.; Raats, M.; Hollywood, L.; McDowell, D.; McCloat, A.; Mooney, E.;
et al. The influence of socio-demographic, psychological and knowledge-related variables alongside perceived cooking and foodskills abilities in the prediction of diet quality in adults: A nationally representative cross-sectional study. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys.
Act. 2016, 13, 111. [CrossRef]
Caraher, M.; Dixon, P.; Lang, T.; Carr-Hill, R. The state of cooking in England: The relationship of cooking skills to food choice. Br.
Food J. 1999, 101, 590–609. [CrossRef]
Adams, J.; Goffe, L.; Adamson, A.J.; Halligan, J.; O’Brien, N.; Purves, R.; Stead, M.; Stocken, D.; White, M. Prevalence andsocio-demographic correlates of cooking skills in UK adults: Cross-sectional analysis of data from the UK National Diet andNutrition Survey. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2015, 12, 99. [CrossRef]
Tani, Y.; Fujiwara, T.; Kondo, K. Cooking skills related to potential benefits for dietary behaviors and weight status among older
Japanese men and women: A cross-sectional study from the JAGES. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2020, 17, 82. [CrossRef]
Van Der Horst, K.; Brunner, T.A.; Siegrist, M. Ready-meal consumption: Associations with weight status and cooking skills.
Public Health Nutr. 2011, 14, 239–245. [CrossRef]
Lam, M.C.L.; Adams, J. Association between home food preparation skills and behaviour, and consumption of ultra-processed
foods: Cross-sectional analysis of the UK National Diet and nutrition survey (2008–2009). Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2017,14, 68. [CrossRef]

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4633

28.
29.
30.
31.

32.

33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.

39.
40.

10 of 10Lavelle, F.; Spence, M.; Hollywood, L.; McGowan, L.; Surgenor, D.; McCloat, A.; Mooney, E.; Caraher, M.; Raats, M.; Dean, M.
Learning cooking skills at different ages: A cross-sectional study. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2016, 13, 119. [CrossRef]
Saito, M.; Kondo, N.; Aida, J.; Kawachi, I.; Koyama, S.; Ojima, T.; Kondo, K. Development of an instrument for community-level
health related social capital among Japanese older people: The JAGES Project. J. Epidemiol. 2017, 27, 221–227. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Tamiya, N.; Noguchi, H.; Nishi, A.; Reich, M.R.; Ikegami, N.; Hashimoto, H.; Shibuya, K.; Kawachi, I.; Campbell, J.C. Population
ageing and wellbeing: Lessons from Japan’s long-term care insurance policy. Lancet 2011, 378, 1183–1192. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Sasaki, Y.; Tsuji, T.; Koyama, S.; Tani, Y.; Saito, T.; Kondo, K.; Kawachi, I.; Aida, J. Neighborhood Ties Reduced Depressive
Symptoms in Older Disaster Survivors: Iwanuma Study, a Natural Experiment. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 337.
[CrossRef]
Tani, Y.; Kondo, N.; Takagi, D.; Saito, M.; Hikichi, H.; Ojima, T.; Kondo, K. Combined effects of eating alone and living alone
on unhealthy dietary behaviors, obesity and underweight in older Japanese adults: Results of the JAGES. Appetite 2015, 95, 1–8.
[CrossRef]
Wada, T.; Ishine, M.; Kita, T.; Fujisawa, M.; Matsubayashi, K. Depression screening of elderly community-dwelling Japanese. J.
Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2003, 51, 1328–1329. [PubMed]
Koyano, W.; Shibata, H.; Nakazato, K.; Haga, H.; Suyama, Y. Measurement of competence: Reliability and validity of the TMIG
Index of Competence. Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 1991, 13, 103–116. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. WASHOKU. Available online: http://www.maff.go.jp/j/keikaku/syokubunka/
culture/pdf/guide_all.pdf (accessed on 6 February 2018). (In Japanese)
Fuchigami, M.; Kuwada, H.; Ishii, K.; Kimura, Y. Regionality of Cooking Culture and Cooking Science: Event Food / Ritual Food.
J. Cook. Sci. Jpn. 2011, 44, 436–441. (In Japanese)
Kamphuis, C.B.M.; MacKenbach, J.P.; Giskes, K.; Huisman, M.; Brug, J.; Van Lenthe, F.J. Why do poor people perceive poor
neighbourhoods? The role of objective neighbourhood features and psychosocial factors. Health Place 2010, 16, 744–754. [CrossRef]
Yuma-Guerrero, P.J.; Cubbin, C.; von Sternberg, K. Neighborhood Social Cohesion as a Mediator of Neighborhood Conditions onMothers’ Engagement in Physical Activity: Results from the Geographic Research on Wellbeing Study. Health Educ. Behav. 2017,44, 845–856. [CrossRef]
Gallo, L.C.; Matthews, K.A. Understanding the association between socioeconomic status and physical health: Do negative
emotions play a role? Psychol. Bull. 2003, 129, 10–51. [CrossRef]
Kearney-Cooke, A. Gender differences and self-esteem. J. Gender-Specific Med. JGSM Off. J. Partnersh. Women’s Health Columbia
1999, 2, 46–52.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury topeople or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.