A matter of the metric? Sugar content overestimation is less pronounced in sugar cubes versus grams

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
{"title":"A matter of the metric? Sugar content overestimation is less pronounced in sugar cubes versus grams","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.nutres.2024.09.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>To make healthy food choices, consumers need to be aware of the sugar content of foods. Units act as an environmental cue that might influence sugar content estimation accuracy. The present study (1) tested whether estimations of sugar content are more accurate in sugar cubes vs grams, (2) compared accuracy of sugar content to estimations of the foods’ weight and energy content, and (3) investigated gender, education, and body mass index as potential correlates. A sample of 886 adults was randomly assigned to estimating the sugar content of 10 common foods in grams or cubes. Estimations of sugar content diverged considerably from actual values in both groups (0.22 ≤ Cohen's <em>d</em>s<sub>gram</sub><sub>s</sub> ≤ 1.20; 0.20 ≤ Cohen's <em>d</em>s<sub>cubes</sub> ≤ 1.10), but were more pronounced for sugar content estimations in grams in 7 out of 10 foods (<em>t</em>s ≥ 4.04, <em>P</em>s &lt; .001, Cohen's <em>d</em>s ≥ 0.14). Sugar content misestimation was somewhat more pronounced than misestimation of weight (0.05 ≤ Cohen's <em>d</em>s ≤ 1.43) and energy content (0.04 ≤ Cohen's <em>d</em>s ≤ 1.19). Relationships between sugar content misestimation and gender (0.00 ≤ Cohen's <em>d</em>s ≤ 0.33), education (–0.07 ≤ <em>r</em> ≤ 0.11), and body mass index (–0.08 ≤ <em>r</em> ≤ 0.06) were mostly negligible. Although sugar content estimations were somewhat more accurate in sugar cubes vs grams, estimation accuracy is generally low. In addition to promoting consumers’ knowledge through labeling and education, additional avenues for interventions might need to be explored for sizeable effects on food choices.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":19245,"journal":{"name":"Nutrition Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nutrition Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0271531724001210","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To make healthy food choices, consumers need to be aware of the sugar content of foods. Units act as an environmental cue that might influence sugar content estimation accuracy. The present study (1) tested whether estimations of sugar content are more accurate in sugar cubes vs grams, (2) compared accuracy of sugar content to estimations of the foods’ weight and energy content, and (3) investigated gender, education, and body mass index as potential correlates. A sample of 886 adults was randomly assigned to estimating the sugar content of 10 common foods in grams or cubes. Estimations of sugar content diverged considerably from actual values in both groups (0.22 ≤ Cohen's dsgrams ≤ 1.20; 0.20 ≤ Cohen's dscubes ≤ 1.10), but were more pronounced for sugar content estimations in grams in 7 out of 10 foods (ts ≥ 4.04, Ps < .001, Cohen's ds ≥ 0.14). Sugar content misestimation was somewhat more pronounced than misestimation of weight (0.05 ≤ Cohen's ds ≤ 1.43) and energy content (0.04 ≤ Cohen's ds ≤ 1.19). Relationships between sugar content misestimation and gender (0.00 ≤ Cohen's ds ≤ 0.33), education (–0.07 ≤ r ≤ 0.11), and body mass index (–0.08 ≤ r ≤ 0.06) were mostly negligible. Although sugar content estimations were somewhat more accurate in sugar cubes vs grams, estimation accuracy is generally low. In addition to promoting consumers’ knowledge through labeling and education, additional avenues for interventions might need to be explored for sizeable effects on food choices.
计量单位的问题?方糖与克糖相比,糖含量被高估的情况不那么明显。
为了选择健康的食品,消费者需要了解食品的含糖量。单位作为一种环境线索,可能会影响糖含量估计的准确性。本研究(1)测试了以方糖为单位与以克为单位估算糖含量是否更准确;(2)比较了糖含量的准确性与食品重量和能量含量的估算;(3)调查了性别、教育程度和体重指数的潜在相关性。对 886 名成年人进行随机抽样,以克或立方为单位估算 10 种常见食物的含糖量。两组人的糖含量估计值与实际值相差很大(0.22 ≤ Cohen's dsgrams ≤ 1.20;0.20 ≤ Cohen's dscubes ≤ 1.10),但在 10 种食物中有 7 种食物的糖含量估计值以克为单位更为明显(ts ≥ 4.04,Ps < .001,Cohen's ds ≥ 0.14)。糖含量误测比重量误测(0.05 ≤ Cohen's ds ≤ 1.43)和能量误测(0.04 ≤ Cohen's ds ≤ 1.19)更明显。糖含量估计错误与性别(0.00 ≤ Cohen's ds ≤ 0.33)、教育程度(-0.07 ≤ r ≤ 0.11)和体重指数(-0.08 ≤ r ≤ 0.06)之间的关系大多可以忽略不计。虽然方糖与克糖的含糖量估计准确度略高,但估计准确度普遍较低。除了通过标签和教育提高消费者的知识水平外,可能还需要探索更多的干预途径,才能对食品选择产生显著效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Nutrition Research
Nutrition Research 医学-营养学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
2.20%
发文量
107
审稿时长
58 days
期刊介绍: Nutrition Research publishes original research articles, communications, and reviews on basic and applied nutrition. The mission of Nutrition Research is to serve as the journal for global communication of nutrition and life sciences research on diet and health. The field of nutrition sciences includes, but is not limited to, the study of nutrients during growth, reproduction, aging, health, and disease. Articles covering basic and applied research on all aspects of nutrition sciences are encouraged, including: nutritional biochemistry and metabolism; metabolomics, nutrient gene interactions; nutrient requirements for health; nutrition and disease; digestion and absorption; nutritional anthropology; epidemiology; the influence of socioeconomic and cultural factors on nutrition of the individual and the community; the impact of nutrient intake on disease response and behavior; the consequences of nutritional deficiency on growth and development, endocrine and nervous systems, and immunity; nutrition and gut microbiota; food intolerance and allergy; nutrient drug interactions; nutrition and aging; nutrition and cancer; obesity; diabetes; and intervention programs.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信