Domel S B, Thompson W O, Baranowski T, Smith A F
Department of Pediatrics, Georgia Prevention Institute, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta 30912-3715.
J Am Diet Assoc. 1994 Nov;94(11):1267-72. doi: 10.1016/0002-8223(94)92458-9.
To determine whether students could verbalize, within 1 1/2 hours, how they remembered items eaten at the school lunch; to determine whether the categories of self-reported retrieval mechanisms were similar for two interview styles, integrated and nonintegrated; and to determine the effect of the two interview style on the accuracy of reporting items eaten by comparing reports with direct observation.
Two styles of dietary intake interviews were compared with observed intake in a school lunch setting.
Two elementary schools in Georgia.
SUBJECTS/SAMPLES: Eighty-two of 106 fourth graders from four classes volunteered; 24 (six per class) were randomly selected and assigned to an interview style. Students interviewed using a nonintegrated style verbalized how they remembered after they had reported everything eaten. Students interviewed using an integrated style verbalized how they remembered at the same time they reported eating each item. Both interview styles included free report followed by prompted report.
Reported retrieval mechanisms were coded into 13 categories. Five measures of performance (specific match rate, general match rate, intrusion rate, omission rate, and overall match rate) were calculated by interview style for free report and prompted report separately.
We analyzed the effect of interview style on the number of students reaching 100% accuracy after prompting and on accuracy of reporting condiments using Fisher's exact test.
Most students could articulate how they remembered items eaten. Reported retrieval mechanism categories were comparable for both interview styles. Visual imagery, usual practice, behavior chaining, and preference were the most commonly reported retrieval mechanisms. Accuracy of free reports did not differ by interview style; however, the nonintegrated interview style produced dietary self-reports with fewer condiment omissions during free report and higher accuracy after prompting.
Determining what retrieval mechanisms children commonly use for remembering items eaten may help researchers design cues to improve the accuracy of dietary self-reports. More accurate dietary self-reports could markedly affect the many types of research that use dietary assessment.
确定学生是否能够在1个半小时内说出他们如何记住在学校午餐时吃的食物；确定两种访谈方式（综合式和非综合式）下自我报告的检索机制类别是否相似；通过将报告与直接观察结果进行比较，确定两种访谈方式对所吃食物报告准确性的影响。
在学校午餐环境中，将两种饮食摄入访谈方式与观察到的摄入量进行比较。
佐治亚州的两所小学。
受试者/样本：来自四个班级的106名四年级学生中有82名自愿参与；随机选择24名（每个班级6名）并分配到一种访谈方式。采用非综合式访谈的学生在报告完所有吃的东西后说出他们是如何记住的。采用综合式访谈的学生在报告吃每一样东西的同时说出他们是如何记住的。两种访谈方式都包括自由报告和提示报告。
报告的检索机制被编码为13类。针对自由报告和提示报告，分别按访谈方式计算了五项表现指标（具体匹配率、一般匹配率、侵入率、遗漏率和总体匹配率）。
我们使用Fisher精确检验分析了访谈方式对提示后达到100%准确性的学生人数以及报告调味品准确性的影响。
大多数学生能够说出他们如何记住所吃的食物。两种访谈方式下报告的检索机制类别具有可比性。视觉意象、习惯做法、行为连锁和偏好是最常报告的检索机制。自由报告的准确性在不同访谈方式下没有差异；然而，非综合式访谈方式在自由报告期间产生的饮食自我报告中调味品遗漏较少，提示后准确性更高。
确定儿童通常使用哪些检索机制来记住所吃的食物，可能有助于研究人员设计线索以提高饮食自我报告的准确性。更准确的饮食自我报告可能会显著影响许多使用饮食评估的研究类型。
