Beyond Algorithms: Cultural Sensitivity and Cost Considerations in User Acceptance of AI-Driven Personalised Nutrition

In the realm of digital health, the personalization of AI-driven nutritional guidance has emerged as a critical factor. This study aims to explore the user’s perception regarding personalization and practicality in relation to AI-generated nutrition plans and diet plans created by dietitians. Furthermore, it highlights the significance of cultural sensitivity, emotional intelligence, and cost as essential determinants of user perceptions. It also emphasizes key factors like cultural sensitivity, emotional intelligence, and cost, which are crucial in determining user perceptions. Data were collected from 126 participants across various age groups ranging from adolescents to adults through a structured questionnaire assessing comfort with AI, personalization quality, cultural integration, and effectiveness relative to Dieticians. The economic aspect is also considered when assessing the feasibility of AI-generated plans. The findings suggest that while AI is perceived as advantageous and potentially more economical, reservations persist regarding its capacity to fully comprehend cultural nuances and offer emotionally attuned guidance. Consequently, the results indicate that enhancing personalization features within AI systems and fostering AI-human collaboration (hybrid models) would likely yield superior outcomes in the realm of nutritional care.

Artificial intelligence (AI), Personalised nutrition, Cultural Preferences, Cost influence, AI-Human collaboration (Hybrid model)

1. Wang, X., Sun, Z., Xue, H., & An, R. (2025). Artificial intelligence applications to personalized dietary recommendations: A systematic review. Healthcare, 13(12), Article 1417. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13121417pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Agrawal, K., Goktas, P., Kumar, N., & Leung, M.-F. (2025). Artificial intelligence in personalized nutrition and food manufacturing: A comprehensive review of methods, applications, and future directions. Frontiers in Nutrition, 12, Article 1636980. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2025.1636980frontiersin [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Kaçar, H. K., Kaçar, Ö. F., & Avery, A. (2025). Diet quality and caloric accuracy in AI-generated diet plans: A comparative study across chatbots. Nutrients, 17(2), Article 206. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu17020206scribbr [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Erik, A., Hamidy, S. M., Karamancıoğlu, H., & Küçük Kırtıklı, B. N. (2025). AI in nutrition: Multi-criteria analysis of diet plans across diverse client profiles. Nutrition Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nutres.2025.12.006 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Aydın, S. K., Ali, R. H., Faiz, S., & Khan, T. A. (2025). An integrated AI framework for personalized nutrition using machine learning and natural language processing for dietary recommendations. Applied Sciences, 15(17), Article 9283. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15179283 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Mundt, C., Yusufoğlu, B., Kudenko, D., Mertoğlu, K., & Esatbeyoglu, T. (2025). AI-driven personalized nutrition: Integrating omics, ethics, and digital health. Nutrients. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Azzimani, K., Haggouni, J., Bihri, H., Khalis, M., Azzouzi, S., & Charaf, M. E. H. (2026). Towards a personalized nutrition using an intelligent dietary assessment system. International Journal of Online and Biomedical Engineering, 22(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijoe.v22i03.59271 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Agrawal, K., Goktas, P., Kumar, N., & Leung, M.-F. (2025). Artificial intelligence in personalized nutrition and food manufacturing: Innovations and challenges. Nutrition and Food Science Journal, 14(1), 45–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nutrfs.2025.04.001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Aydın, Ö., Ali, R. H., Faiz, S., & Khan, T. A. (2025). Patient and clinician perspectives on the acceptance of AI-enabled nutrition and health tools: A mixed-methods study. Journal of Medical Internet Research – Digital Health, 13(3), Article e45678. https://doi.org/10.2196/45678 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Azzimani, L., Haggouni, J., Bihri, H., Khalis, M., Azzouzi, S., & Charaf, M. E. H. (2026). Cost-effectiveness and adoption of AI-based nutrition platforms in low- and middle-income settings. Health Policy and Technology, 15(2), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2026.01.005 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Kaçar, I., Kaçar, Ö. F., & Avery, A. (2025). Comparing AI-generated diet plans with dietitian-created plans: A comparative study of accuracy, personalization, and user satisfaction. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 125(4), 567–579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2025.01.012 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Wang, Y., Sun, Z., Xue, H., & An, R. (2025). Perceived effectiveness and trust in AI-supported health recommendations: A survey of patients and caregivers. Digital Health, 11, Article 1123456789. https://doi.org/10.1177/1123456789 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Mundt, C., Yusufoğlu, B., Kudenko, D., Mertoğlu, K., & Esatbeyoglu, T. (2025). AI-driven personalized nutrition: Integrating omics, ethics, and cultural considerations. Nutrients, 17(10), Article 2310. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu17102310 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Erik, P., Hamidy, S. M., Karamancıoğlu, H., & Küçük Kırtıklı, B. N. (2025). Cultural competence and digital nutrition tools: Assessing the gap in AI-based dietary guidance. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 57(2), 112–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2025.01.003 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Bajwa, J., Munir, U., Nori, A., & Williams, B. (2021). Artificial intelligence in healthcare: Transforming the practice of medicine and the delivery of care. BMJ Health & Care Informatics, 28(1), Article e100219. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2020-100219scribbr [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Temming, J., Rauch, J., & Wegge, J. (2023). An integrative review on the acceptance of artificial intelligence among healthcare professionals. npj Digital Medicine, 6(1), Article 89. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-023-00852-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Patients’ perceptions of artificial intelligence acceptance in healthcare. (2025). Journal of Medical Internet Research – Patient-Reported Outcomes, 8(3), Article e45678. https://doi.org/10.2196/45678 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Putri, L., Rezani, M. R., & Hermina, D. (2025). Correlational research design. Jurnal Riset Multidisiplin Edukasi, 2(6), 306–317. https://doi.org/10.71282/jurmie.v2i6.456 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2015). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 4(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Faber, J., & Fonseca, L. M. (2014). How sample size influences research outcomes. Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics, 19(4), 27–29. https://doi.org/10.1590/2176-9451.19.4.027-029.ebo [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. DeVellis, R. F., & Thorpe, C. T. (2021). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R., & Young, S. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, Article 149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Sapsford, R., & Jupp, V. (Eds.). (1996). Data collection and analysis. Sage. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Sandra, R., & Hariko, R. (2025). Application of descriptive and inferential statistics in guidance and counseling research. Kawakib: Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 1(3), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.63738/kawakib.v1i3.21 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Ahmed, H. S. (2025). Inferential statistics for cardiothoracic surgeons: Part 3—Drawing valid conclusions from clinical data. Indian Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 41(2), 233–247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12055-024-01867-7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Alshihayb, T. S., Alnasser, L. A., Al-Soneidar, W. A., & et al. (2025). Some misinterpretations of inferential statistics in dental public health literature. BMC Oral Health, 25(1), Article 1760. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-025-06962-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Celis-Morales, C., Livingstone, K. M., Marsaux, C. F. M., Macready, A. L., Fallaize, R., O’Donovan, C. B., Woolhead, C., Forster, H., Walsh, M. C., Navas-Carretero, S., San-Cristobal, R., Lambrinou, C. P., Moschonis, G., Godlewska, M., Surwiłło, A., Grimaldi, K., Bouwman, J., Daly, E., Navas, A., . . . Mathers, J. C. (2015). Design and baseline characteristics of the Food4Me study: A web-based randomised controlled trial of personalised nutrition in seven European countries. Genes & Nutrition, 10(1), Article 450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12263-014-0450-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Ordovas, J. M., & Berciano, S. (2020). Personalized nutrition and healthy aging. Nutrition Reviews, 78(Supplement_3), 58–65. https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuaa102 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Revolutionizing Library Services in Nairobi: Ethical Implications and Future Trends in User Interaction
• ESPYREAL: A Mobile Based Multi-Currency Identifier for Visually Impaired Individuals Using Convolutional Neural Network
• Comparative Analysis of AI-Driven IoT-Based Smart Agriculture Platforms with Blockchain-Enabled Marketplaces
• AI-Based Dish Recommender System for Reducing Fruit Waste through Spoilage Detection and Ripeness Assessment
• SEA-TALK: An AI-Powered Voice Translator and Southeast Asian Dialects Recognition