Search

Background: Ambivalence towards food and diet, which favours behavioural inertia, might be a barrier to adopting healthier eating behaviours. Measuring it can help researchers to better understand its relationship with behaviour change and design interventions aimed at resolving it. In this scoping review, we map and describe methods and tools employed in studies to assess, measure or classify the ambivalence of participants towards food‐ and diet‐related attitude objects. Methods: In accordance with Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for conducting scoping reviews, we retrieved peer‐reviewed studies from MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, FSTA and Food Science Source and preprints from PsyArXiv and MedRxiv. Two independent reviewers screened the articles. We considered for inclusion peer‐reviewed studies and preprints that assessed the ambivalence of participants of any age, sex or sociodemographic group towards food and diet. Results: We included 45 studies published between 1992 and 2022, which included participants from 17 countries. Eighteen methods were employed across the included studies to assess different types of ambivalence (felt, potential or cognitive–affective), the most frequent of which were the Griffin Index, the Subjective Ambivalence Questionnaire, the MouseTracker Paradigm and the Orientation to Chocolate Questionnaire. Conclusion: This scoping review identified several methods and tools to assess different types of ambivalence towards food‐ and diet‐related objects, providing an array of options for future studies. Key points: We identified 45 studies from 17 countries that assessed ambivalence towards food‐ and diet‐related attitude objects across eight databases. Most authors seem consistent in their definitions of ambivalence, referring to the simultaneous presence of positive and negative evaluations towards an attitude object, with some authors emphasising the similarity in the intensity of these evaluations. A total of 18 different methods to assess ambivalence towards food and diet were identified. The most frequently employed methods across the literature identified in this review were the Griffin Index, the Subjective Ambivalence Questionnaire, the MouseTracker Paradigm and the Orientation to Chocolate Questionnaire. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Drinks can contribute to energy as well as micro‐ and macro‐nutrient intake. Drink‐specific, validated, quick and easy to administer questionnaires are needed to monitor secular trends in beverage consumption for different populations. The aim of the present cross‐sectional study was to develop and validate a drink‐specific questionnaire for the Greek population. Methods: A 41‐item semi‐quantitative drinks frequency questionnaire (DFQ) was developed and validated against 7‐day weighed food records, among young Greek adults. Wilcoxon ranks tests, Kendall tau‐b correlations and Bland–Altman plot were used to compare the two methods. Fifty‐nine Greek University students (28 males, 31 females) completed both methods. Results: No difference was observed in total drinks intake between the two methods. The Bland–Altman plot showed that the two methods are likely to agree concerning the total drinks intake. Wilcoxon's rank test showed no significant differences between the two methods, except for the 'whiskey/vodka/gin' intake (P < 0.001). 'Good' agreement (tau‐b > 0.61) was observed for most DFQ items, including low‐fat and chocolate milk, hot chocolate, Greek/espresso coffee, commercial tea, packaged fruit juices, wine, alcohol‐free beer, light cola‐type drinks and water (tap/bottled/sparkling). 'Low' agreement (<0.30) was noted for filtered/instant/iced coffee, freshly squeezed orange juice and some alcoholic drinks (beer/whiskey/vodka/gin). Conclusions: The DFQ appears to be an overall valid means of estimating the habitual intake of drinks in large‐scale epidemiological surveys. The study supports the use of DFQ for assessing drinks consumption patterns and secular trends. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]