# Consumer Perceptions and Attitudes Towards Ultra-Processed Foods
## 5 Data Analysis
### Preliminary Statistical Analysis  
To profile the survey participants, descriptive statistical analyses were conducted, including percentage distributions, descriptive statistics, and correlation analysis. Table 2 summarises the demographic characteristics of the survey participants. The majority were female, representing 77% of the total sample (Question 1). Participants under the age of 30 comprised 64% of the respondents (Question 2). Furthermore, the survey predominantly included individuals from urban areas, accounting for 97.6% of the total responses (Question 3). The majority of survey participants were from Plovdiv Province, accounting for 71% of the total responses. Respondents from Haskovo Province made up 7%, while those from Pazardzhik Province represented 6% of the sample (Question 4). Overall, the survey predominantly covered the South-Central region, which included 88% of the participants, followed by the Southeastern and Southwestern regions with 7.9% and 2.4%, respectively. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Variables of the Sample**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**No. of Consumers**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Percentage (\%)**} \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{1. Gender} & Male & 68 & 23.4 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Female & 222 & 76.6 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{2. Age} & Under 20 & 229 & 41.0 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Between 21 and 30 & 67 & 23.1 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Between 31 and 40 & 33 & 11.4 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Between 41 and 50 & 37 & 12.8 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Over 50 & 34 & 11.7 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{3. Place of residence} & City & 196 & 67.6 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Town & 88 & 30.3 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Village & 6 & 2.1 \\ \cline{2-4}  & & - & - \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{5. Monthly income per household member} & Less than BGN 1438 & 137 & 47.2 \\ \cline{2-4}  & More than BGN 1438 & 153 & 52.8 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{6. Education} & High school & 168 & 57.9 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Bachelor & 59 & 20.3 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Master & 58 & 19.7 \\ \cline{2-4}  & PhD & 6 & 2.1 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{7. Share of UPFs in your daily menu} & I do not consume (0\%) & 26 & 9.0 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Less than 25\% & 149 & 51.4 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Between 25\% and 50\% & 97 & 33.4 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Between 50\% and 75\% & 15 & 5.2 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Over 75\% & 3 & 1.0 \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{8. How are the UPS you consume divided by product group (do not consume (0\%), less than 25\%, between 25\% and 50\%, between 50\% and 75\%, over 75\%)} & Snacks & 53, 142, 70, 19, 6, 183, 49, 241, 6, 2,1 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Frozen meals & 107, 136, 34, 13, 0 & 36.9, 46.9, 117, 4, 5, 0,0 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Fast food & 68, 140, 54, 23, 5 & 23.4, 48.3, 186.7, 9, 17 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Packaged breads and pasta & 52, 136, 54, 32, 16 & 17.9, 46.9, 18.6, 11.0, 5,5 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Processed meat & 46, 135, 61, 39, 9 & 15.9, 46.6, 21.0, 13.4, 3.1 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Sweetened cereals & 125, 113, 32, 14, 6 & 43.1, 39.0, 11.0, 48.2 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Sweetened dairy products & 82, 135, 46, 20, 7 & 28.3, 46.6, 15.9, 6.9, 24 \\ \cline{2-4}  & Instant soups and pasta & 177, 76, 24, 11, 2 & 61.0, 26.2, 8.3, 3.8, 0.7 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Consumer profiles in the sample (\(n=290\)). Our respondents were nearly equally divided into two groups based on their family income: 47% had an income below the necessary net monthly income for the maintenance of a working person, while 53% had an income above this threshold (Question 5). In terms of educational background, 42.1% of the respondents had attained education beyond secondary school, while 57.9% held a secondary school degree (Question 6). Most respondents consumed UPFs in small amounts, with the majority keeping their intake below 25% of their daily diet. Only a small portion of respondents (6.2%) had diets in which UPFs constituted the majority of their intake (Question 7).