1) Fast Food
Secondary school pupils’ food choices around schools in a London borough: Fast food and walls of crisps
- PMID: 27105582
- DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2016.04.016
Nowadays, there are a number of studies, conducted in the fast food field, but Caraher et al., (2016) are studying how fast food places around schools influence students’ eating habits. (ibid., p. 208).
The current work is carried out for parents who must know what their children spend money on, for pupils themselves to start caring about their food ration, and also for Public English Health to improve the quality of meal offers in existing food places (ibid., p.217).
The main statement is that although the meals in the school canteen are better in the case of quality and health, pupils tend to choose junk food outside (ibid., p.208).
This tendency of not eating in school exhibits due to the motives related to “5As” (See the Figure 1):
1) Accessibility.
2) Availability.
3) Affordability.
4) Acceptability & Attitude (ibid., p. 217).
1) Regardless that schools have partial or full stay-on-site policies, pupils actively attend accessible fast food outlets and cafes which are about 200m distant (ibid., p.217).
2) There is a concentration of almost 12 fast food outlets in average available within 400m around the schools (ibid., p.212).
3) Normally having £10-12 per week, pupils can afford to go to the junk food stores, which gives half price offers for students, such as 1.50£ for lunch (ibid., p.212)
4) In terms of attitude, pupils consider in their own interest to buy cheap and \”cool\” meals in fast food cafes, rather than healthy at school (ibid., p.217).
Figure 1- Diagram showing the relationship between the evidence, specific arguments and overall argument of Caraher et al.’s research.
The authors apply four methods: geographic information system(GIS) with producing the maps with fast food outlets around schools, use the maps materials to select the schools for further investigations, observation students’ activity in the fast food outlets and focus groups with pupils (ibid., p.209). Data mapping method is useful because it has given a visual picture with the quantity of fast food places around schools, while imaged format of GIS is easy to record and understand. The observational study allows invigilating over what students actually eat, rather what they respond they do, while focus groups method has provided the researchers with interactive pupils’ eating preferences and saved time which could be spent on interviewing.
These methods also produce slight limitations, such as the research is conducted within the territory of 400m around schools, and not on the way from and to them. Probably, full observation can demonstrate a broader pattern of pupils’ appetites, because on the way they perhaps have a wider range of food places (ibid., p.216). In addition to this, a team of five observers is perhaps not enough to monitor all the pupils, due to the fact it seems to be complicated to follow everyone. So, final data may be slightly inaccurate.
Alternatively, researchers could have been applied experimental method, such as it is performed by Gerend (2009, p.84), where researchers have given participants food menus with and without calorie information to evaluate how calorie labeling on fast food items can impact their meal choices. For the experiment in this research, it can be suggested to encourage pupils to eat in school café by making cheap offers there, and record how their eating behaviors would change because of discounts.
Although the research explains pupils’ food preferences in details, it is not mentioning how eating fast food in childhood can influence their future health condition, such as it is analysed by Bowman et al. (2004, p.112) where the researchers are mentioning concrete hazards for health related to fast food consumption in childhood.
Overall, this research is conducted very well, because it combines both accurate methodology and strong evidence, which are able to properly explain the statement made.
605 words
2. Poverty in perspective.
Wood, C., Salter, J., Morrell, G., Barnes, M., Paget, A. and O’Leary, D.
Wood et al., (2016, p. 13) are writing the research to create a new understanding of how people struggle with poverty on “Child” poverty example.
The research has been conducted for policymakers and practitioners to show them a wider pattern of poverty, for public to accent the seriousness of the issue and for the Coalition Government to help with the development of alternative measurements of poverty (ibid., p. 17).
The main statement is that diverse aspects of poverty must be analysed in a multi-dimensional way, which is more competent than one-dimensional (ibid., p. 259)
1. Poverty must be measured by 20 indicators, such as financial income, health, and wellbeing, work, and education, etc. because they are equally important.
2. The multi-dimensional approach is simple for understanding.
3. The multi-dimensional model is a valid tool to combat poverty. (ibid., p. 65).
To prove the effectiveness of multi-dimensional model (figure 1), the researchers have focused on poverty in a household with children and identify five groups: grafters, full house families, pressured parents, vulnerable mothers, managing mothers (ibid., p. 65):
1. If measure separately, employed people with high qualifications are not poor through these indicators, but they can still be excluded due to low incomes (ibid., p. 143);
2. Model enables to analyse poverty through “real lives” of people and shows clear visual evidence rather than numerical and abstract data (ibid., p. 259);
3. a) Approach discovers concrete problems of poverty from “real life” situations, such as mental illness or drug and alcohol problems;
b) Recognising specific problems of each person in a broader policy context allows applying special needs for everyone to overcome the poverty of the whole group (ibid.,p.139).
Figure 1. Diagram showing the relationship between the evidence, specific argument and overall argument of Wood et al.’s study.
The researchers use five methods: selections of poverty indicators, analysis of the Understanding Society dataset, follow-up interviews, toolkit development and testing the evaluations at the local level (ibid.,p. 139). Twenty poverty indicators such as finance, housing, health, etc. have helped to develop a more nuanced pattern of poverty experience (ibid.,p. 85), while secondary analysis of Understanding Society survey has allowed identifying poverty types (ibid.,p. 93). Interviews are advantageous because they have enabled to investigate each type by capturing people the real-life experience of poverty (ibid.,p. 95), while toolkit application can provide suitable support for all types (ibid.,p. 101).
There are some weaknesses of methodology, that the interviews have been conducted among a particular number of people, so in terms of the whole population, information can be incorrect to some extent (ibid.,p. 31). Moreover, there are people, who are perhaps suffering from the highest pressure of poverty, which are not involved in the surveys, such as homeless, prisoners. In addition to this, the interviews record only people’s opinions about their housing, income, etc., rather than actual facts of those. So, all these factors can affect the final data.
Alternatively, it can be suggested to apply focus groups in this research, to evaluate detailed information about personal and group experiences on poverty and save time which has been spent on interviews. For instance, Lau et al., (2015, p. 386) conduct focus groups to gain public understanding of social exclusion and establish indicators for the second step of research.
Regardless that the research has suggested to effectively measure poverty by the set of indicators, it has not mentioned weaknesses of each such as it was done by Roosa et al., (2005, p. 976) to outline general mistakes in most common poverty measures.
To sum up, regardless of limitations, evidence showed multi-dimensional approach effectiveness proves the statement made because they are sustained by appropriate methodology and rather precise data.
593 words.
3. University students’ views on bullying from the perspective of different participant roles.
Myers, C., Cowie, H.
Myers and Cowie, (2013, p. 252) have conducted the research to evaluate diverse student’s views on how bullying at university may affect all parties: victim, perpetrator, and bystander through the role play approach.
The research has been addressed to educators, students themselves and policy makers to recognize the existence of bullying and its influence on students (ibid., p. 252).
The main argument is that today’s society considers bullying and cyberbullying not significant issues, however, they can negatively impact on victims and that is why it is necessary to tackle them more effectively (ibid., p. 251).
1. In reality, bullying targets see bullying as a marginalization of them (ibid., p. 259).
2. Perpetrators and observers typically believe that bullying is joking and funny rather than offensive (ibid., p. 260).
Despite that study’s evidence had been based on a fictional scenario with ‘perpetrator’, ‘victim’ and ‘bystander’, the power of bullying occurs as rather serious (see the Figure 1):
1. ‘Victims’ feel disappointed and upset, they are able to empathize with a target role and understand the range of possible consequences, which can affect both: health and education (ibid., p. 262).
2. a) ‘Perpetrators’ are not able to recognize their actions\’ consequences, regarding them as banter, justifying themselves by the fact that ‘victim’ takes jokes too seriously (ibid., p. 260).
b) ‘Observers’ are more likely to blame the ‘victim’ and refuse to be involved by saying that problem must be sorted out between victim and perpetrator (ibid., p. 251).
Figure 1. Diagram, showing the relationship between the evidence, specific argument and main argument of Myers’s research.
The research has been based on voluntary role-play method, which has involved 60 university students, allocated in three different roles: ‘victims’ of bullying, ‘bullies’ and ‘bystanders’. The role-play approach in this research is used, because it can give a broad understanding of how the situation may perhaps develop in real-life, on the example of participants’ behavior and emotions in the simulated play (ibid., p. 257).
On the one hand, this method probably approves itself, through showing participants\’ emotions and feelings, such as \’victim\’ feels offended and excluded after actions from \’perpetrator\’, without straight intervention into the personal experience of the participant. Moreover, approach depicts that students, who take part, are able to fully get into their characters and act probably as if this concrete situation is real.
On the other hand, the method can discredit the reliability of showed results, because it is perhaps wrong to argue that same person would react similarly in the real life by the sample from the role-play, where they probably react in the way they suppose to in accordance with the given scenario. However, participants themselves state that process has stirred up their feelings, made play sincere and induced to think about the significance of bullying consequences (ibid., p. 259).
In addition to this role-play method, researchers could have been used interviews, where students could tell about their attitude to bullying and personal experience of its impact on them, such as it has been done by Purcell, (2012, p. 276) where to understand how school children suffer from bullies, they are telling their personal participation in bullying activities.
Although, Myers and Cowie, (2013) claim that probable consequences of bullying can be very serious, they do not mention them concretely to define a real danger of bullying, such as it has been discussed in Samnani and Singh, (2012) where researchers identify real effects of bullying in the workplace, which are: intention to leave the job, absenteeism and even suicide.
To summarize, the role-play method is reasonable in this study, because it has proved that power of bullying at university is underestimated and it needs to be combated more efficiently.
2016-12-21-1482345990