Employing Rothschild’s Motivation–Opportunity–Ability framework, the present study examines the extent to which heterogeneity in barriers regarding the motivation, the perceived opportunity and the perceived ability to choose low-calorie over high-calorie snacks is associated with the proportion of low-calorie snack choices in real life. Furthermore, the study investigates which dominant barrier profiles can be discerned.

Data were obtained from a survey about participants’ motivation, opportunity and ability to choose low-calorie over high-calorie snacks and an FFQ that measured habitual consumption of snack foods and beverages. Data were analysed using R packages lavaan and NbClust, and IBM SPSS Statistics.

A representative sample (n 1318) of the Dutch population based on gender (686 women), age and education level.

For both snack foods and beverages, motivation to choose low-calorie over high-calorie snacks was associated strongest with proportions of low-calorie choices. The perceived ability and perceived opportunity were also associated with proportions of low-calorie choices, albeit to a lesser extent. Furthermore, three dominant profiles of barriers were identified: the no-barrier profile, the lack-of-opportunity profile and the lack-of-motivation profile. These profiles differed significantly on proportions of low-calorie snack choices, daily meal consumption and sociodemographic characteristics.

Heterogeneity in barriers regarding the motivation, the perceived opportunity and the perceived ability to choose low-calorie over high-calorie snacks is associated with the proportion of low-calorie snack choices in real life. By identifying and appreciating heterogeneity in barriers, the present study provides further incentives for the tailoring of intervention strategies.