Kann man Popularität und Freundschaft essen?
Der Zusammenhang zwischen wahrgenommener Ernährung populärer und sympathischer Kinder und dem eigenen Ernährungsverhalten von Kindern
Abstract
Warum Kinder und Jugendliche bestimmte Nahrungsmittel bevorzugen, ist eine zentrale Forschungsfrage. Da die Akzeptanz durch die Peers in diesem Lebensalter eine zentrale Entwicklungsaufgabe darstellt, untersucht die vorliegende Studie, wie das Ernährungsverhalten von sozial positiv und negativ bewerteten Peers wahrgenommen wird und wie das eigene Ernährungsverhalten der Kinder und Jugendlichen damit assoziiert ist. Ferner wird untersucht, inwieweit dieser Zusammenhang von der sozialen Nähe (eigene Freunde vs. populäre Kinder aus der eigenen Klasse) abhängt. Insgesamt 70 Kinder und Jugendliche einer Konstanzer Grund- und Realschule schätzten ein, wie häufig ihre Peers gesunde und ungesunde Speisen konsumierten. Außerdem wurden sie zu ihren eigenen Nahrungsmittelpräferenzen und ihrem eigenen Ernährungsverhalten befragt. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die Kinder und Jugendlichen populären und sympathischen Peers ein signifikant gesünderes Ernährungsverhalten zuschrieben als sozial negativ bewerteten Peers. Interessanterweise war jedoch vor allem das wahrgenommene ungesunde Ernährungsverhalten der populären und sympathischen Peers mit der eigenen Nahrungsmittelpräferenz und dem eigenen Ernährungsverhalten assoziiert. Je häufiger populäre oder sympathische Peers nach Ansicht der Kinder und Jugendlichen ungesund aßen, desto häufiger präferierten die Kinder und Jugendlichen die ungesündere Alternative in der Präferenzaufgabe und desto weniger ungesund aßen sie selbst. Dabei waren die Effekte für Kinder, die als populär wahrgenommen wurden, stärker als für sympathische Kinder. Mögliche Gründe für den Zusammenhang von Popularität und Sympathie von Peers und dem Ernährungsverhalten von Kindern und Jugendlichen werden diskutiert.
The present study examines the social determinants of eating behavior in children and adolescents. Becoming accepted by one’s peers represents a central developmental task during this age. Accordingly, the aim of the present study was to examine how eating behavior of socially positive or negative evaluated peers is perceived and how children’s consumption of foods is associated with these perceptions. In total, 70 children and adolescents of a German elementary and secondary school were asked to estimate how often their peers consume healthy und unhealthy foods and their own food preferences and eating behavior were assessed. The results indicate that children and adolescents perceived the eating behavior of popular and likeable peers as being significantly healthier as compared to unpopular and unlikable peers. Interestingly, the perceived unhealthy eating behavior of popular and likeable peers was related to the food preferences and eating behavior of the children and adolescents. Specifically, children and adolescents showed less preference for healthy foods and consumed more often unhealthy foods, the more they believed that popular and likeable peers consumed unhealthy foods. This effect was most pronounced for popular peers. Possible reasons for the relationship of peers’ popularity and likeability with the eating behavior of children and adolescents are discussed.
Literatur
2011). Weight-related behavior among adolescents: The role of peer effects. PloS one, 6, e21179. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0021179
(1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
(1980). Effects of peer models’ food choices and eating behaviors on preschoolers’ food preferences. Child Development, 51, 489 – 496. doi:10.2307/1129283
(1999). Development of food preferences. Annual Review of Nutrition, 19, 41 – 62. doi:10.1146/annurev.nutr.19.1.41
(1993). „Junk food” and „healthy food”: Meanings of food in adolescent women’s culture. Journal of Nutrition Education, 25, 108 – 113. doi:10.1016/S0022 – 3182(12)80566 – 8
(2012). Family-related predictors of body weight and weight-related behaviours among children and adolescents: A systematic umbrella review. Child: Care, Health and Development, 38, 321 – 331. doi:10.1111/j.1365 – 2214.2011.01285.x
(1982). Dimensions and types of social status: A cross-age perspective. Developmental Psychology, 18, 557 – 570. doi:10.1037//0012 – 1649.18.4.557
(2001). Healthy eating: What does it mean to adolescents? Journal of Nutrition Education, 33, 193 – 198. doi:10.1016/S1499 – 4046(06)60031 – 6
(2010). Obesity-related behaviors in adolescent friendship networks. Social Networks, 32, 161 – 167. doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2009.09.001
(2010). Friends’ dieting and disordered eating behaviors among adolescents five years later: Findings from project EAT. The Journal of Adolescent Health, 47, 67 – 73. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.12.030
(2002). Parental influences on young girls’ fruit and vegetable, micronutrient, and fat intakes. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 102, 58 – 64. Retrieved from http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2530939&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract
(2009). Cool and independent or foolish and undisciplined? Adolescents’ prototypes of (un)healthy eaters and their association with eating behaviour. Appetite, 53, 407 – 413. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2009.08.008
(2010). Self-control, diet concerns and eater prototypes influence fatty foods consumption of adolescents in three countries. Health Education Research, 25, 1031 – 1041. doi:10.1093/her/cyq055
(1998). Fruit and vegetable consumption, nutritional knowledge and beliefs in mothers and children. Appetite, 31, 205 – 228. doi:10.1006/appe.1998.0180
(2009). Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 549 – 576. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085530
(2001). Dislikes, distastes and the undesired self: Conceptualising and exploring the role of the undesired end state in consumer experience. Journal of Marketing Management, 17, 73 – 104. doi:10.1362/0267257012571447
(2001). Perzentile für den Body-mass-Index für das Kindes- und Jugendalter unter Heranziehung verschiedener deutscher Stichproben. Monatsschrift Kinderheilkunde, 149, 807 – 818. doi:10.1007/s001120170107
(1999). Children’s interpersonal perceptions as a function of sociometric and peer-perceived popularity. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 160, 225 – 242. doi:10.1080/00221329909595394
(2002). Children’s perceptions of popular and unpopular peers: A multimethod assessment. Developmental Psychology, 38, 635 – 647. doi:10.1037//0012 – 1649.38.5.635
(1990). Development and change of young adults’ preventive health beliefs and behavior: Influence from parents and peers. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 31, 240 – 259. doi:10.2307/2136890
(2001). Socioeconomic differences in the consumption of vegetables, fruit and fruit juices. The influence of psychosocial factors. European Journal of Public Health, 11, 51 – 59. doi:10.1093/eurpub/11.1.51
(2004). Burger boy and sporty girl: Children and young people’s attitudes towards food in school. Ilford, UK: Barnardo’s. Retrieved December 12, 2012, from http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q=intitle:Burger+boy+and+sporty+girl: +children+and+young+people’s+attitudes+towards+ food+in+school#0
(1987). Ten years of research on the false-consensus effect: An empirical and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 72 – 90. doi:10.1037//0033 – 2909.102.1.72
(1998). Sociometric popularity and peer-perceived popularity: Two distinct dimensions of peer status. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 18, 125 – 144. doi:10.1177/0272431698018002001
(2005). A review of family and social determinants of children’s eating patterns and diet quality. Journal of the American College of Nutrition, 24, 83 – 92. Retrieved December 12, 2012, from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15798074
(1993). Adolescent (in)vulnerability. American Psychologist, 48, 102 – 116. doi:10.1037/0003 – 066X.48.2.102
(2011). The perception of health risks. In H. S. Friedman (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of health psychology (pp. 637 – 665). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Retrieved December 12, 2012, from http://kops.ub.uni-konstanz.de/handle/comm-4/browse?authority =pop189639&type=author
(2012). Why we eat what we eat: The Eating Motivation Survey (TEMS). Appetite, 222, 1 – 9. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2012.04.004
(2009). Optimismus. In , Handbuch der Persönlichkeitspsychologie und differentiellen Psychologie (Bd. 2, S. 446 – 453). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
(2004). Evidence that school-age children can self-report on their health. Ambulatory Pediatrics, 4, 371 – 376. doi:10.1367/A03 – 178R.1
(2011). Social matching of food intake and the need for social acceptance. Appetite, 56, 747 – 752. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2011.03.001
(1977). The „false consensus effect”: An egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 279 – 301. doi:10.1016/0022 – 1031(77)90049-X
(1984). Family resemblance in attitudes to foods. Developmental Psychology, 20, 309 – 314. doi:10.1037//0012 – 1649.20.2.309
(2007). Peer influence on pre-adolescent girls’ snack intake: Effects of weight status. Appetite, 49, 177 – 182. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2007.01.011
(2011). Why healthy eating is bad for young people’s health: Identity, belonging and food. Social Science & Medicine, 72, 1131 – 1139. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.12.029
(1995). Development of a measure of the motives underlying the selection of food: The food choice questionnaire. Appetite, 25, 267 – 284. doi:10.1006/appe.1995.0061
(2011). Relative validation of the KiGGS Food Frequency Questionnaire among adolescents in Germany. Nutrition Journal, 10, 133 – 145. doi:10.1186/1475 – 2891 – 10 – 133
(1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207 – 232. doi:10.1016/0010 – 0285(73)90033 – 9
(2007). Consumption stereotypes and impression management: How you are what you eat. Appetite, 48, 265 – 277. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2006.10.008
(2011). Do children and their parents eat a similar diet? Resemblance in child and parental dietary intake: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 65, 177 – 189. doi:10.1136/jech.2009.095901
(1982). Egocentrism as a source of unrealistic optimism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 195 – 200. doi:10.1177/0146167282082002
(2003). European education production functions: What makes a difference for student achievement in Europe? (European Economy–Economic Papers No. 190.). Brussels, Belgium: European Comission, Directorate General Economic and Monetary Affairs. Retrieved December 12, 2012, from http://ideas.repec.org/p/euf/ecopap/0190.html
(