DD6HW8 Evaluating a Source

Title of article:  College Freshman Perceptions of Effective and Ineffective Aspects of Nutrition


Purpose:  Why was the resource written: to inform, to present options, to report research, or to sell a product? For what audience is it intended?

• The purpose of this article was to report research.  The purpose of the research was to assess the effectiveness of nutrition education taught to college freshman by graduate students. The audience intended for this article is anyone in the public health field studying nutrition, or using and implementing different nutrition education models. 

Authority:  What are the author's credentials? Are qualifications, experience, or institutional affiliation given? 

• Three of authors are employed at Georgia State University, two in the Division of Nutrition and one int eh Department of Educational Psychology and Special Education. The other author is employed at Georgia Perimeter College in the Department of Humanities. Three of the four authors are PhDs, two are RDs, one is a MFA/MS. Their credentials appear to make them qualified (strength); however 3 are from the same university.  I would be interested in hearing from other higher-ed institutions as well. 

Accuracy:  Is the information correct and free from errors?

• This article includes information that appears to be correct. Visuals of focus group questions are included, as well as the themes from the focus groups.  The authors also include limitations of the study after the results, which shows there may be potential bias. Use of visuals is a strength, as well as the headings throughout this article, specifically the Themes. 

Timelines:  Is the information current or does it provide the proper historical context for your research?

• The research study was conducted in 2004, but published in the Journal of American College Health in 2010. Since it takes time to conduct research, have it peer-reviewed and published, this time frame amy be appropriate; however, I would be interested in seeing updated information to see if this nutritional education model is currently producing the same results. Therefore, the timeline could be both a strength and a weakness. 

Coverage:  Does the source cover the topic in depth, partially, or is it a broad overview?

• The source covers the topic in depth (strength). The introduction gives history, background and current examples of the issues with nutrition among college students.  In the Methods section they describe procedure and list the focus group questions, and in the Results section, they list and describe various themes discovered from focus groups. 

Objectivity:  Does the information show bias or does it present multiple viewpoints?

• As with any research study, there are always potential biases.  This article focused on the viewpoint of the benefits of nutrition education, and in particular, one specific nutrition model. They used both open-ended and close-ended questions which is a strength and helps eliminate bias, but there sample was relatively small (weakness) since it was a qualitative study. They did note some limitations, such as the lack of ability to generalize results since all the students came from one university, and the students that participated were already interested in nutrition. 

Kicklighter, Jana Regina, et al. "College freshmen perceptions of effective and ineffective aspects of nutrition education." Journal of American College Health 59.2 (2010): 98-104.