解码误解:探索饮食质量自评中的测量误差

IF 4.9 1区 农林科学 Q1 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY Food Quality and Preference Pub Date : 2024-05-31 DOI:10.1016/j.foodqual.2024.105234
Yawotse Nouve , Shuoli Zhao , Yuqing Zheng
{"title":"解码误解:探索饮食质量自评中的测量误差","authors":"Yawotse Nouve ,&nbsp;Shuoli Zhao ,&nbsp;Yuqing Zheng","doi":"10.1016/j.foodqual.2024.105234","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>How much should we trust self-rated diet quality? Measures based on self-perception are often used in diet evaluation, but they can sometimes be subject to diverse biases. Using a unique setting provided by the nationally representative FoodAPS data where questions about diet quality are asked twice with intermediate reminders in between, we first show that the structure of survey questions can help identify inconsistency in the respondents’ self-rated diet quality. Findings reveal that respondents tend to deliver responses that align with their earlier responses. We then validate the respondents’ self-rated diet quality against their household’s healthy eating index, an objective measure of diet quality based on actual food acquisitions. We find no statistically significant association between self-rated diet quality and healthy eating index for respondents who display inconsistency in self-assessing their diet quality. Conversely, that relationship is significant for respondents with no such inconsistency. Our findings suggest an effective question design measuring diet quality, that can be generalized to the design of health survey questions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":322,"journal":{"name":"Food Quality and Preference","volume":"120 ","pages":"Article 105234"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Decoding the misperception: Exploring measurement error in self-rated assessments of diet quality\",\"authors\":\"Yawotse Nouve ,&nbsp;Shuoli Zhao ,&nbsp;Yuqing Zheng\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.foodqual.2024.105234\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>How much should we trust self-rated diet quality? Measures based on self-perception are often used in diet evaluation, but they can sometimes be subject to diverse biases. Using a unique setting provided by the nationally representative FoodAPS data where questions about diet quality are asked twice with intermediate reminders in between, we first show that the structure of survey questions can help identify inconsistency in the respondents’ self-rated diet quality. Findings reveal that respondents tend to deliver responses that align with their earlier responses. We then validate the respondents’ self-rated diet quality against their household’s healthy eating index, an objective measure of diet quality based on actual food acquisitions. We find no statistically significant association between self-rated diet quality and healthy eating index for respondents who display inconsistency in self-assessing their diet quality. Conversely, that relationship is significant for respondents with no such inconsistency. Our findings suggest an effective question design measuring diet quality, that can be generalized to the design of health survey questions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":322,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Food Quality and Preference\",\"volume\":\"120 \",\"pages\":\"Article 105234\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Food Quality and Preference\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950329324001368\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Quality and Preference","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950329324001368","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们应该在多大程度上相信自我评价的饮食质量?基于自我感觉的测量方法经常被用于膳食评估,但它们有时会受到各种偏差的影响。利用具有全国代表性的 FoodAPS 数据所提供的独特环境,我们首先展示了调查问题的结构有助于识别受访者自我评价饮食质量的不一致性。调查结果显示,受访者的回答往往与他们之前的回答一致。然后,我们将受访者自评的饮食质量与他们家庭的健康饮食指数进行验证,健康饮食指数是根据实际购买的食物来客观衡量饮食质量的指标。我们发现,对于自我评估饮食质量不一致的受访者来说,自评饮食质量与健康饮食指数之间没有统计学意义上的显著关联。相反,对于没有这种不一致性的受访者来说,两者之间的关系则很明显。我们的研究结果表明,测量饮食质量的问题设计是有效的,可以推广到健康调查问题的设计中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Decoding the misperception: Exploring measurement error in self-rated assessments of diet quality

How much should we trust self-rated diet quality? Measures based on self-perception are often used in diet evaluation, but they can sometimes be subject to diverse biases. Using a unique setting provided by the nationally representative FoodAPS data where questions about diet quality are asked twice with intermediate reminders in between, we first show that the structure of survey questions can help identify inconsistency in the respondents’ self-rated diet quality. Findings reveal that respondents tend to deliver responses that align with their earlier responses. We then validate the respondents’ self-rated diet quality against their household’s healthy eating index, an objective measure of diet quality based on actual food acquisitions. We find no statistically significant association between self-rated diet quality and healthy eating index for respondents who display inconsistency in self-assessing their diet quality. Conversely, that relationship is significant for respondents with no such inconsistency. Our findings suggest an effective question design measuring diet quality, that can be generalized to the design of health survey questions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Food Quality and Preference
Food Quality and Preference 工程技术-食品科技
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
15.10%
发文量
263
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Food Quality and Preference is a journal devoted to sensory, consumer and behavioural research in food and non-food products. It publishes original research, critical reviews, and short communications in sensory and consumer science, and sensometrics. In addition, the journal publishes special invited issues on important timely topics and from relevant conferences. These are aimed at bridging the gap between research and application, bringing together authors and readers in consumer and market research, sensory science, sensometrics and sensory evaluation, nutrition and food choice, as well as food research, product development and sensory quality assurance. Submissions to Food Quality and Preference are limited to papers that include some form of human measurement; papers that are limited to physical/chemical measures or the routine application of sensory, consumer or econometric analysis will not be considered unless they specifically make a novel scientific contribution in line with the journal''s coverage as outlined below.
期刊最新文献
Dip increases eating rate and promotes greater intake even when energy density is reduced Meat alternative consumers still frowned upon in Europe: Analysis of stereotypical, emotional and behavioral responses of observing others The role of nutrition background on motivations, barriers, and adherence to a vegan diet: A qualitative study of the vegan eating habits and nutritional evaluation survey (VEGAN-EatS) Comparison of free-comment online product reviews and central location product testing for sensory product characterisation: A case study with coffee consumers Olfactory modulation of visual attention and preference towards congruent food products: An eye tracking study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1