4.5 Article

How do children make food choices? Using a think -aloud method to explore the role of internal and external factors on eating behaviour

期刊

APPETITE
卷 147, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2019.104551

关键词

Food; Choices; Understanding; Decision making; Children

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research indicates that eating related problems, body weight and eating habits often start in childhood and track through to adulthood. To date, however, little is known about how children conceptualise food and the factors involved in their decision making processes. This qualitative study aimed to explore children's understanding of food and how this influences their food related decisions. Children (n = 27) aged 9-10 took part in a think-aloud study and voiced their thoughts whilst making different meals and snacks using pictures of food. Data were analysed using thematic analysis which described 3 core themes: i) drivers of food decisions (hunger, health, liking, emotions, availability) ii) sources of these drivers (parents, peers, routine); iii) polarised reasoning whereby food was often dichotomised as good or bad. Transcending these themes was the degree of deliberation whereby children showed decision making as automatic, considered or sanctioned. Finally, overarching their accounts was the notion of the transitioning child with children illustrating the shift between being a passive child whose decisions were made for them and an active child with autonomy and agency. The results illustrate the ways in which children begin to internalise the messages of others as they grow older which they incorporate into their own schema. These messages in turn form part of their heuristic system which enable less sanctioned decisions as children take ownership of their own eating behaviour. The results are discussed in terms of the implications for decision making and a framework for developing interventions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据