Search

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the usefulness of a simplified version of cognitive response analysis (CRA) as a formative evaluation tool for health education materials developed for small, unfunded projects. Design/methodology/approach: A group of women (n=15), aged between 25 and 50 years, provided cognitive responses (CRs) that communicated their ongoing thoughts after viewing each slide in a narrated, online slide presentation that focused on nutrient content claims. Participants were assigned in a systematic random fashion to one of three CRA variations. In all three variations, participants simultaneously saw a slide and heard its narration and then provided their CRs while still viewing the slide. In Variation 1, a researcher wrote participants' CRs on a log sheet (n=5). Variation 2 participants' audiotaped their CRs which were later transcribed by a researcher (n=5). Variation 3 participants wrote their CRs on a log sheet. To assess the quality and usefulness of the CRs generated by each variation, the researchers categorized each CR into content-related categories. Findings: The time and effort required by the researcher and participants for all three variations of collecting CRs was similar. However, transcribing the audiotaped CRs presented a greater time burden to the researcher. Analysis of variance revealed that Variation 3 generated significantly fewer CRs than the other two variations. In addition, CRs from those in Variation 3 tended to be shorter and less specific and were less useful in refining the presentation because they provided limited guidance on needed improvements. In contrast, the CRs generated by Variations 1 and 2 were judged to be more useful in identifying improvements that could optimize the value of the presentation. Originality/value: The results suggest that a simplified version of CRA is a valuable, efficient, and low-cost tool for formative evaluation of health education materials. (Contains 1 table.)

To link to full-text access for this article, visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jada.2006.06.006 Byline: Jaime Schwartz, Carol Byrd-Bredbenner Abstract: The incidence of obesity has increased in parallel with increasing portion sizes of individually packaged and ready-to-eat prepared foods as well as foods served at restaurants. Portion distortion (perceiving large portion sizes as appropriate amounts to eat at a single eating occasion) may contribute to increasing energy intakes and expanding waistlines. The purpose of this study was to determine typical portion sizes that young adults select, how typical portion sizes compare with reference portion sizes (based in this study on the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act's quantities of food customarily eaten per eating occasion), and whether the size of typical portions has changed over time.

Purpose – The purpose of this study was to explore the usefulness of a simplified version of cognitive response analysis (CRA) as a formative evaluation tool for health education materials developed for small, unfunded projects. Design/methodology/approach – A group of women (n=15), aged between 25 and 50 years, provided cognitive responses (CRs) that communicated their ongoing thoughts after viewing each slide in a narrated, online slide presentation that focused on nutrient content claims. Participants were assigned in a systematic random fashion to one of three CRA variations. In all three variations, participants simultaneously saw a slide and heard its narration and then provided their CRs while still viewing the slide. In Variation 1, a researcher wrote participants' CRs on a log sheet (n=5). Variation 2 participants' audiotaped their CRs which were later transcribed by a researcher (n=5). Variation 3 participants wrote their CRs on a log sheet. To assess the quality and usefulness of the CRs generated by each variation, the researchers categorized each CR into content-related categories. Findings – The time and effort required by the researcher and participants for all three variations of collecting CRs was similar. However, transcribing the audiotaped CRs presented a greater time burden to the researcher. Analysis of variance revealed that Variation 3 generated significantly fewer CRs than the other two variations. In addition, CRs from those in Variation 3 tended to be shorter and less specific and were less useful in refining the presentation because they provided limited guidance on needed improvements. In contrast, the CRs generated by Variations 1 and 2 were judged to be more useful in identifying improvements that could optimize the value of the presentation. Originality/value – The results suggest that a simplified version of CRA is a valuable, efficient, and low-cost tool for formative evaluation of health education materials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]