Household food and beverage purchasing.
Household food and beverage purchasing.
复制标题
家庭食品和饮料采购。
DOI：
10.1016/j.jada.2009.04.030
复制
发表时间：
2009
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Stevens,June
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Byrd-Bredbenner,Carol;Bryant,Maria;Stevens,June
在2008年12月出版的《华尔街日报》上，弗伦奇和他的同事们发表了一篇文章，他们说：“目前，带注释的收据和记录是衡量家庭购买行为最全面、最详细的方法，对于基于人口的样本来说是可行的。由于其成本和复杂性，不建议使用通用产品代码扫描”（1）。鉴于我们在通用产品代码（UPC）扫描技术方面的经验（2-8），我们尊重这些声明。目前使用的收据注释和UPC扫描用于捕获两种不同的结构：购买的食物与家中的食物。一个声明，即UPC是一个低劣的方法来捕捉购买应伴随着一个声明，即收据注释是一个低劣的方法来捕捉食品在家里。此外，接收方法要求受试者广泛依从，需要经过培训的人员进行大量处理和解释，重复测量次数未知，以便做到全面，可能无法充分评估食物获取情况。每种方法都有优点和缺点，但总的来说，我们认为UPC扫描是更有前途的方法。为了使用收据收集食物购买数据，参与者必须收集，保存和交付纸质收据给研究人员;但更有问题的是，收据通常只印了很少或根本没有关于购买性质的细节。因此，参与者必须仔细注释每次购买。收据的功能主要是作为记忆提示，而不是作为记录。很可能许多人不会完全遵守严格参与的要求，因此，从“基于人口”的抽样中收集数据的工作受到威胁。相比之下，UPC扫描技术避免了消费者注释自己的收据时引入的自我报告和社会期望偏见，避免了收据上缺失或难以辨认的手写注释所引入的错误，并且参与者的负担要低得多。接收注释的负担将降低数据有效性和受试者招募。确实有些
In their article published in the December 2008 issue of the Journal, French and colleagues stated,“Currently, annotated receipts and records are the most comprehensive, detailed measure of household purchasing behavior, and are feasible for population-based samples. Universal Product Code scanning is not recommended due to its cost and complexity”(1). Given our experience with Universal Product Code (UPC) scanning technology (2–8), we respectfully take issue with these statements. As currently used, receipt annotations and UPC scanning are used to capture two different constructs: foods purchased vs foods in the home. A statement that UPCs are an inferior method for capturing purchases should be accompanied by a statement that receipt annotation is an inferior method for capturing foods in the homes. In addition, the receipt methodology requires extensive compliance from subjects, a large amount of processing and interpretation by trained personnel, and an unknown number of repeated measures in order to be comprehensive, which may not fully assess food acquisition. Each methodology has strengths and weaknesses, but overall we believe UPC scanning is the method of greater promise.To collect data on food purchases using receipts, participants must be relied upon to collect, save, and deliver paper receipts to the researcher; but even more problematic is the fact that receipts are often printed with very few or no details concerning the nature of the purchase other than cost. Thus, the participant must carefully annotate each purchase. The receipt functions mostly as a memory prompt, not as a record. It is very likely that many individuals will not fully comply with the required rigorous involvement, and therefore the collection of data from a “population-based” sample is threatened. In comparison, UPC scanning technology avoids self-report and social desirability bias introduced by consumers annotating their own receipts, avoids errors introduced by missing or illegible handwritten annotations to receipts, and has a much lower participant burden. The burden of receipt annotation will reduce both data validity and subject recruitment. It is true that some