University Students Intend to Eat Better but Lack Coping Self-Efficacy and Knowledge of Dietary Recommendations
Abstract Objective To assess university students’ knowledge, intentions, and coping self-efficacy related to dietary recommendations. Design The study used a cross-sectional online survey. Setting Large university campus. Participants Students (n = 6,638; 22% response). Variables Measured Self-effic...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of nutrition education and behavior 2016-01, Vol.48 (1), p.12-19.e1 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Abstract Objective To assess university students’ knowledge, intentions, and coping self-efficacy related to dietary recommendations. Design The study used a cross-sectional online survey. Setting Large university campus. Participants Students (n = 6,638; 22% response). Variables Measured Self-efficacy and intentions were measured using 11-point scales. Students’ perceived dietary recommendations were evaluated as correct or incorrect. Analysis Categorical variables were analyzed using chi-square and continuous variables by t tests or ANOVAs. Significance was set at P ≤ .05 and multiple comparisons at P ≤ .01. Results Respondents believed that they need fewer vegetables and fruit and more milk or alternatives servings/d than recommended; eg, males aged ≥ 19 years perceived milk or alternatives recommendations to be 4.3 ± 2.1 servings/d, significantly more than the 2 servings/d recommended ( P < .001). Students in health sciences or with a food or nutrition course were significantly more likely to claim that they met recommendations (eg, 56% with vs 47% without a food or nutrition course for vegetables and fruit; P < .001); however, they were no more likely to identify them correctly. Males aged < 19 years had higher coping self-efficacy than females aged < 19 years to consume vegetables (68.3 ± 24.2 vs 64.0 ± 24.7; P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1499-4046 1878-2620 1708-8259 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.jneb.2015.08.005 |