Search

Background: There is evidence that most people are aware of the importance of healthy eating and have a broad understanding regarding types of food that enhance or detract from health. However, greater health literacy does not always result in healthier eating. Andreasen's Social Marketing Model and Community-Based Social Marketing both posit that, in order to change health behaviours, it is crucial to understand reasons for current behaviours and perceived barriers and benefits to improved behaviours. Limited research has been conducted, however, that explores these issues with general populations. This study aimed to help address this gap in the evidence using a qualitative methodology. Methods: Three group discussions were conducted with a total of 23 participants: (1) young women aged 18–24 with no children; (2) women aged 35–45 with primary school aged children; and (3) men aged 35–50 living with a partner and with pre- or primary school aged children. The discussions took place in a regional centre of Victoria, Australia. Transcriptions were thematically analysed using an inductive descriptive approach and with reference to a recent integrated framework of food choice that identified five key interrelated determinants: food– internal factors; food– external factors; personal-state factors; cognitive factors; and sociocultural factors. Results: We found that food choice was complex, with all five determinants evident from the discussions. However, the "Social environment" sub-category of "Food-external factors", which included family, work, and social structures, and expectations (or perceived expectations) of family members, colleagues, friends, and others, was particularly prominent. Knowledge that one should practice healthy eating, which falls under the "Cognitive factor" category, while seen as an aspiration by most participants, was often viewed as unrealistic, trumped by the need and/or desire for convenience, a combination of Food-external factor: Social environment and Personal-state factor: Psychological components. Conclusions: We found that decisions regarding what, when, and how much to eat are seen as heavily influenced by factors outside the control of the individual. It appears, therefore, that a key to improving people's eating behaviours is to make it easy to eat more healthfully, or at least not much harder than eating poorly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many studies rely on self-reported height and weight. While a substantial body of literature exists on misreporting of height and weight, little exists on improving accuracy. The aim of this study was to determine, using an experimental design and a comparative approach, whether the accuracy of self-reported height and weight data can be increased by improving how these questions are asked in surveys, drawing on the relevant evidence from the psychology and survey research literatures. Methods: Two surveys from two separate studies were used to test our hypotheses (Science Survey, n = 1,200; Eating Behaviours Survey, n = 200). Participants were randomly assigned to one of six conditions, four of which were designed to improve the accuracy of the self-reported height and weight data ("preamble"), and two of which served as the control conditions ("no preamble"). Four hypotheses were tested: (H1) survey participants read a preamble prior to being asked their height and weight will report lower heights and higher weights than those not read a preamble; (H2) the impact of question-wording (i.e., preamble vs. no preamble) on self-reported weight will be greater for participants with higher BMIs; (H3) the impact of question-wording on height will be greater for older participants; (H4) either version of the weight question – standard or "weight-specific"—may result in participants reporting more accurate self-reported weight. One-way MANOVA was conducted to test Hypothesis 1; two-way analysis of variance were conducted to test Hypothesis 2; moderation analysis was used to test Hypothesis 3; independent samples t-test was conducted to test Hypothesis 4. Results: None of the hypotheses was supported. Conclusions: This paper provides an important starting point from which to inform further work exploring how question wording can improve self-reported measurement of height and weight. Future research should explore how question preambles may or may not operationalise hypothesised underlying mechanisms, the sensitivity or intrusiveness of height and weight questions, individual beliefs about one's height and weight, and survey context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]