4.5 Article

Cool and independent or foolish and undisciplined? Adolescents' prototypes of (un)healthy eaters and their association with eating behaviour

Journal

APPETITE
Volume 53, Issue 3, Pages 407-413

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2009.08.008

Keywords

Prototypes; Eating behaviour; Peers; Adolescents; Social image

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: The Prototype/Willingness model states that adolescents' willingness to engage in health-related behaviours is determined by the favourability of prototypes of persons engaging in this behaviour. The objective of the present Study is to systematically investigate the content and evaluation of adolescents' prototypes of (un)healthy eaters and examine their associations with eating behaviour. Methods: Four studies (including a pilot study) were conducted that addressed the salience (N = 79), the characteristics (N = 287), and the evaluation (N = 167) of eater prototypes, and their association with eating behaviour (N = 97), respectively. Results: These studies revealed that (I) adolescents hold salient and distinct images of typical (un)healthy eaters; (2) the healthy eater prototype mostly consists of positive traits whereas the unhealthy eater prototype reflects mostly negative traits; (3) eater-specific prototypes are distinct from generic risk prototypes and unrelated to age, bodyweight, and social desirability; and (4) unhealthy eater prototypes are significantly associated with unhealthy eating behaviour. Conclusion: Adolescents hold relatively unfavourable social images Of unhealthy eaters and relatively favourable images of healthy eaters. Only unhealthy eater prototypes are associated with actual food consumption, Suggesting that addressing unhealthy eater prototypes may be an important and novel ingredient of interventions aimed at changing adolescents' unhealthy eating habits. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available