4.5 Article

Positive- and negative peer modelling effects on young children's consumption of novel blue foods

期刊

APPETITE
卷 52, 期 3, 页码 646-653

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2009.02.016

关键词

Young children; Novel foods; Positive peer modelling; Negative peer modelling; Consumption; Preference reversal; Food acceptance; Generalisation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The effects of positive- and negative peer modelling on children's consumption of a novel blue food, presented in each of four snack meals during an activity day, were evaluated. It was predicted that: (i) novel food consumption would increase after positive modelling, but decrease after negative modelling; (ii) modelling effects would generalise to a second novel blue food when participants were alone when they ate their snack; (iii) that positive modelling would reverse the effects of negative modelling. Design: A mixed design was employed with random assignment to either Groups A, B, or C (equal numbers of males and females per group). Within groups, each participant received the novel food on four snack occasions. Group A received positive modelling of blue food consumption on the first and third occasions, but were alone when they received the foods on the second and fourth occasions; Group B had negative modelling on the first occasion, positive modelling on the third, and ate alone on the second and fourth; Group C ate alone on all four occasions. To measure generalisation, an additional blue food was presented in all second and fourth alone occasions. Participants: Thirty-five 5-7-year olds took part in Study 1, and 44 3-4-year olds in Study 2. Results: All main predictions were confirmed except that positive peer modelling did not reverse the effects of negative modelling in the 3-4-year olds. Conclusion: Negative peer modelling inhibits novel food consumption, and its effects are particularly difficult to reverse in younger children. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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