Question 2
Many children responded in qualitative terms (not much, a little, a lot) versus quantitative (measure or weight) for the 24-hour recalls. The qualitative answers were then converted into quantitative terms. Do you think that this may play a part in the accuracy of all interview conditions?
posted by Anonymous @ 6:49 PM
13 comments
13 Comments:
This question is a little difficult to answer because I do not know the conversion factors used to convert the qualitative terms into quantitative measurements. However, I think it would absolutely affect the accuracy of the interview conditions for the sole reason that "not much," "a little" and "a lot" can all mean completely different things from one child to the next. Therefore, how do the researchers determine what "a lot" means in measurement form such as cups or ounces? Unless, they changed the conversion factors to meet each individual child's perception (which is highly unlikely, close to being impossible), then I cannot see how converting the answers from qualitative to quantitative would not decrease the accuracy of the results.
It makes sense that the children responded in qualitative terms since they are likely not familiar with portion sizes and amounts. I do think that converting the responses into quantitative terms may play a role in how accurate the information is. While some children may think that a Large bowl of cereal is "not much" because that is what they are used to at home or his/her family members have set an example of what portions are "normal" in their family, other children may look at that bowl and call it "a lot" so it is really hard for me to see how the answers can be converted into quantitative terms without falsifying some of the information. If I had more information on how they did this in the study then I may have a different perspective.
I definitely think that this would play a part in the accuracy of the recalls. I don’t think that all fourth graders would have the same idea of what “a lot” or “a little” would be. This could pose quite a problem if the interviewers were not clarifying the answers with standard units of measure. And I also feel that even if the interviewers were clarifying the answers, with this age group, it may still not be accurate. I think that if the children’s perceptions of portion sizes are skewed, they may give an inaccurate answer even if they were asked to be more specific. I think it would be best to try and eliminate qualitative answers as possibilities to avoid this.
I agree with you Rose. I definitely think that the children's perceptions of portion sizes may be skewed therefore the accuracy in the anwers from a qualitative standpoint are not as vaild as they could be. I do think that there is a better way to get accurate results in this study.
I think this definitely plays a part in the accuracy of all the interview conditions. "Not much," "a little" and "a lot" could all mean different things to different people, especially those in different age groups. Obviously these children were not familiar enough with quantitative amounts to answer using them. Therefore, how they describe the amount they eat is based on what they have learned is "a lot" or a "little" through environmental factors (parents, friends, etc.). The fact that the amounts the children reported eating is somewhat ambiguous, makes me question the validity of the data.
I really think this could have negatively impacted accuracy via both reliability and validity in the study. This assumes that the researcher conceptualizes amounts in the same way as the 4th grader, which seems to be an egregious error from the get-go. As RD's, qualitative measurements are not satisfactory for adult patients/clients, so why would they be for children, who may have an even more skewed concept of portion size? (My brother would often eat an entire box of Kraft Mac N Cheese growing up--for him, this was a normal portion size.)
~Anna Taylor
Melanie, good point that kids are not likely familiar with portion sizes and amounts. It did make me wonder, however, why not make them more familiar at an earlier age? Maybe it would be beneficial to give children some more responsibility. After Diabetes Camp, I know that children ~11 or so can definitely be responsible for what they put in their mouth; why not all children? Or, at least, including children with basic portion estimation skills in studies such as these.
~Anna Taylor
I understand why fourth graders would respond qualitatively, and why the responses are so simplistic. However, how did the researchers convert these into tangible measurements? I question the reliability of this method, and believe that it absolutely affected the accuracy of the recalls. Based on the portion sizes the kids are used to at home, the definitions for 'a little' and 'a lot' could be vastly different. Again, this would be an appropriate time to use food models or measuring cups to demonstrate what they mean by these terms.
Anna, you make a great point! Why is it that children shouldn't know portion sizes? I have heard that some health classes go over portion sizes with kids but some schools don't even offer a health and wellness class. It should be something that is incorporated into a math class maybe. Just like they learn certain words in spanish throughout their years in school, they too should be learning portion sizes each year and how to measure using cups, ounces, ect. Food measurements shouldn't just be for kids with certain medical conditions such as Diabetes. All children would benefit learning how to measure out foods and what consists of a cup, teaspoon, ounce, pound, ect. Now, just incorporate that into learning how to read a food label and our jobs would be made much easier in the long run!
I have actually seen a child answer this way when asked what they typically eat in a day during one of my internship rotations. The RD followed up that question with another question using measuring cups asking the child to be more specific. Food models were also used to help clarify the qualitative responses. This seems like it is almost necessary in order to get an accurate picture of the child's consumption. If this was how the researchers converted the qualitative answers into quantitative ones then it may increase the accuracy of the 24-hour recall.
Bethany:
I completely agree with what you are saying about the health classes offered to children. I have been asking children that I meet if they have ever learned how to read a food label at school and they all have replied with "no." I agree that this as well as learning portion sizes and how to measure out foods should definitely become part of the curriculum as soon as possible. Children should at least be able to read a food label by the time they graduate from high school.
I definitely feel by converting the qualitative answers into quantitative terms that the results will be less accurate. I mean, each person is going to have a different definition of “a little” or “a lot”. The fact that what the kids reported to eat may not be very accurate along with the fact that they converted these terms, makes me think that the findings may not be entirely valid. I feel like trying to determine what children eat accurately seems like a very difficult task.
I agree with everyone's ideas and points. I think we would all agree that there is a void in the nutrition education of children. Not just within a child describing food in quantitative versus qualitative measurements, but as Sarah U said, reading a basic food label. In addition to RDs lobbying to increase nutrition education in schools, I think it would be beneficial to children if reading labels and food measurements was integrated into their math curriculum at a young age. Many of the concepts parallel. Instilling knowledge of portion and serving sizes in children at a young age may ultimately help battle the childhood obesity epidemic.
Post a Comment
<< Home