Question 2:
The population used for the study was low-income African American mothers and adolescents in the Chicago urban area. Do you think the study result would hold true with a higher income population, or a population in a less urban area?
posted by Myra Davis @ 1:04 PM
27 comments
27 Comments:
Initially, I thought that a higher income or more rural population may yield more significant eating patterns between mothers and their adolescent children for many reasons. Higher income and rural populations are usually thought to have healthier options at home, eat together as a family more frequently, and have more parental supervision and guidance. However, as the current study mentions, other research that has included this type of population show fairly consistent results related to the Chicago urban participants. Yes, the numbers in the other studies were a bit more significant. However, I think it is clear that more family time-eating together, food preparation, etc- is needed in all types of people in this country.
I think that the study would probably differ if a different population group was used. I think that a higher income family would have more options for their children and more scheduled eating times. I’m guessing that the higher income family would eat more meals together. The children wouldn’t be on free/reduced lunches in school and the mother wouldn’t have to rely on WIC for food. I think that the mother and children would eat healthier, but I think that children still need more calories/nutrients at this time while they are growing. Again, more studies using a higher/lower income populations would be interesting.
I think that the result of the study if done in a high income population would still hold true but it would not be as significant. This could be due to the parents eating more meals in the home as well as a higher income to buy healthier foods. There is always the education factor that could come into play. Families with higher income typically have high education. Families with higher education are more likely to know the benefits of eating healthy and would pass these values down to their children.
As stated in the article, this study’s conclusion suggests that external factors, such as meals consumed away from home or peer pressure, most likely play a significant role in shaping adolescent eating behaviors. I think that the results could vary if this study were to involve higher income families, mainly because it would to a great extent depend upon whether or not both parents are working. Having both parents in the work force and children involved in school activities could make it challenging to keep a family’s lifestyle in check. Even though individuals with a higher total income are able to afford healthier and more nutrient dense food options, it does not necessarily imply that these individuals will purchase and/or provide these food items for and to their families.
In some degree, possibly. Higher income adolescents would still being eating lunch as school and now they may have more money to allow them to get more snack foods and soda. However, they may have more parental influence since they will likely be eating breakfast and dinner at home and their parents have more money to make healthier meals. In a less urban area, I would guess that the parental influence would be stronger because these would be farming communities that would also eat what they grow. Packed lunches would be more common than buying lunch at school as well. That being said, this study also commented on how influential peers could be and that I would bet would still be true. Parents in these communities may be able to be more involved but that doesn’t mean that their children are going to listen to them over their friends.
Rachel-
I like what you said about kids listening to their peers. Parents might be involved and try to be a good role model when it comes to eating, but to get the child to listen and adapt these qualities is another thing. Often children do not really like listening to their parents and do the "uncool" thing. I think peer pressure is huge...Good Point!!
I think that if the income level and setting of the study was altered, the results would be altered. As far as income level is concerned, usually parents that make more money can afford to/will buy healthier food, and encourage their children to sit down and eat the healthful meal that has been prepared. Likewise, Americans who live in rural settings may not have as many events and activities going on in their neighborhoods, enabling them to spend more time focusing on preparing a healthier meal and enforcing their offspring to consume the nutritious meal.
I do not think this population group can be generalized to a higher income or a group living in a rural area. This was a fairly small sample size of one race, socioeconomic status, and location in the U.S. If they wanted to generalize the study, they should have used a wider range of participants.
Colin, I had not initially thought of the education factor. That is a good point that those with more education typically have more money and therefore should have more information regarding healthy food options and how to make good food decisions.
Yes, the results would likely be different. Income has been shown to be positively associated with the preparation of fresh fruits and vegetables. A higher income population might have higher rates of 2 head of households, meaning dual income or one stay at home parent. This could effect the level of influence parents have on their kid's dietary choices.
Maybe...I think it's important to remember that this study is looking at the behavior of adolescents and this is a population that is profoundly affected by peer opinion, no matter what the SES status. Given that a higher income population is generally better educated, it's possible that a study looking at these teens might see some better outcomes due to more knowledge of nutrition issues. Also, it's possible that a higher income family might have a least one parent at home more frequently, resulting in more family meals and opportunities for checking in on kids and therefore influencing food choices. On the other hand, there are plenty of high SES families where both parents are working and away from home frequently. This would be an interesting study to do.
I am not sure if a different population would show more significant results or not. Yes, there would be more money for healthier foods. But a more wealthy population also has more hectic schedules and my not eat as a family more. Them main difference in knowledge between the populations would be that the wealthier population would be more likely to know about healthy eating as compared to the lower income, but the question then is do they put the knowledge to use?
Katherine,
I agree that generalizing to larger groups from this small sample wouldn't be logical. They might be able with a larger sample to generalize to low income African American mothers in New York though.
It is interesting the assumptions many of us made about the life-styles of certain "populations". Bad dietary/lifestyle habits are equal opportunity.
I don't know that there would be a difference in assiociation between child and parent intake in a higher income family. I actually think it would be less due to the parents working (the study pf low income families had an unemployment rate of almost 50%). Childrens intakes will most likely be better however, living in higher income households. These children often attend higher income schools, who therefore have the funding from the state, community, or tuition, that allows them to make improvements in their lunch offerings at school. For example, many schools that can afford to do so are adding salad bars to the cafeteria; the emphasis is on healthier options.
I think if this study was done in a higher income family, the results would depend on how much the parents are home and how often they eat together as a family. If a high income family never eats together because the parents are always working, than I believe the results would be the same as in the lower income families. Although if the higher income parents had more time and ate together more often, I believe the study would yield more significant results. As far as a less urban area, I don't feel that this would change the results of the study at all.
Tori and Meredith, I definitely agree that a higher income does not necessarily mean healthier eating among families. Wealthier families do seem to have more hectic schedules which ultimately seem to affect family eating times and patterns. Also, even if an individual has all the knowledge in the world pertaining to nutrition, it does not necessarily mean that he/she is going to "put this knowledge to use." Therefore, I think that there are many other factors, besides income and education, which play significant roles in a family's eating patterns.
It would be a good comparison study, but my thought is yes they would be the same. I think just because the children may have more access to foods does not mean they are more likely to consume them. In higher income household both parents may work and not be around enough to take the time to teach the children the importance of eating a nutritious meal. Because the parents are busy the children may have babysitters to take care of the meals, and who knows if they are given any instruction on what the parents would like their children to eat. As the children get older the parents may just give the child money to buy something on there own to eat. No time is every given to the kids to learn how to cook healthy and therefore they don't know how to make anything nutritious to eat. Again I think it would be a good study but the end results may be very similar.
Susan
Several of you said there may be a parent at home and they may be able to focus on more nutritious meals. It is a good point, there are so many different factors to think about.
Susan
It is my oppinion that if you were to do the same exact test on a higher income or rural population, the results would be directly opposite. My reasoning for this that from my experience more rural and high income families spend more time together. In addition, there is something to be said about higher income families being more educated than those who are in lower socioeconomic classes.
Even after reading others' responses and opinions on this question, I agree with Shelby in that rural families with a higher income spend more time together, and more time and money on food preparation and consumption. I also believe that the point she made about families with a higher income being more educated about nutritious choices is valid.
Jennifer Vassiliou
I think the correlations between the eating patterns of mother and child will stay the same if the only variable looked at is income. A significant portion of families across all income levels choose not to eat meals together, leaving adolescent children to eat with their friends. As we all said before in the Question 1 responses, food eaten by children away from their parents tends to not reflect the parents' eating habits.
I would venture a guess, however, that rural families would exhibit a more significant relationship than urban families that have more convenient access to food outside of the home. Even if the adolescents were eating at a friend's house, away from their families, they would still be more likely to be eating food from a fridge that would hopefully be stocked with more choices than a corner convenience store. This may lead the adolescents to choose the kind of food that can be found in their own fridges at home...the same kinds of foods their parents eat.
Emily--
Love the comment about equal opportunity eating habits. It's so very true. Today's American lifestyle doesn't allow most people--regardless of income or neighborhood--the opportunity to have unlimited mealtime with their families. All sorts of families have parents whose work schedules collide with dinnertime. So many people are rushed in the morning. A majority schoolaged kids eat lunch without their parents. Through it all, kids eat with their friends, or their siblings, or by themselves. The chance to imprint a parent's nutrition practices on their children seem very limited...in all kinds of families.
Yes, I believe the results would be altered if a different population was used. Higher income population are more likely to have a higher level of education, so they are more likely to have access to doctors and other medical professionals which can educate them on the benefits of proper nutrition. Higher income families can also afford the healthier options so the food in the house will influence the children even if the parents are not home. A rural population is also more likely to have a correlation between mother and children eating habits because they are more likely to eat together. Rural areas are less likely to have places to go out to eat, so the families are more likely to eat at home together.
Erin,
Your response made me think of an article I read about low-income neighborhoods' access to fresh fruits and vegetables.
Factually, there are less grocery stores in low income neighborhoods; companies do not see a profit opportunity, and therefore will not invest in a store there. This leaves families who do not have access to transportation to rely on groceries from the convience store at the corner, who offer very little "healthy" foods.
So yes, a higher income, less urban area may have different results than what was discovered in this study.
Carrie,
Yes! I read a similar article, too. Some of the bigger supermarkets won't invest in low-income areas and this makes it really hard for families to do food shopping well. Imagine what it's like to shop when the most readily available place is the quick-shop-type place connected to the local gas station! This article said this was a reality for a lot of people. So, even if a family is trying to make an effort in terms of spending meal time together, etc., a low SES family might still have an issue with access to quality foods.
Alison, I like how you pointed out that a definite factor would be if a parent is home more often in a home with a higher economical status. A parent being home more often would most likely lead to more meals together as a family, which would lead to greater influence on the child's nutritional status. Good point! And would be interesting to do another study on- using both parents working away from the home as an indicator.
Post a Comment
<< Home