Upload
mary-c-kirk
View
217
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Factors Affecting Food Choices of Working Mothers With Young Families
MARY C. KIRKl AND ARDYTH H. GILLESPIE2
IFamily Practice Residency Training Program, Affiliated with University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98119; and 2Division of Nutritional Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853-4401
ABSTRACT A two-stage data collection method (focus group interviews followed by an individual probing technique) was used to study influences on working mothers' food choices for their families. Data were analyzed using a thematic content approach through which five categories or perspectives were identified. Three of these perspectives - "nutritionist," "economist," and "manager-organizer" - have been commonly addressed in nutrition education. Two additional perspectives -"meaning-creator" and "family diplomat" - that affect working mothers' food choices were identified. The working mothers also revealed that they experienced guilt related to family mealtime activities. aNE 22:161-168, 1990)
INTRODUCTION
A major social change in the United States influencing nutrition education for families with children is that increasing numbers of mothers of young children work outside their homes. Working outside the home not only affects how these mothers allocate their time, but also affects how their households are organized socially, how they perceive their role as mother, and how well they perform in this role. Barnet and Baruch (1), for example, found that employed mothers spent less time interacting with their children than did non-employed mothers. Gillespie and Achterberg found that mothers' working status was related to their attitudes about the importance of nutrition and how much they discussed food and nutrition topics with their families (2). These factors ultimately affect how working mothers make family food choices.
Previous research has indicated that family food preferences have an important influence on mothers when they make food choices for their family (3--5). Other foodrelated influences that have been identified include taste, cost, ease of preparation, and calorie content (4). The survey methods used in these studies were, however,
Address for correspondence: Ardyth H. Gillespie, Division of Nutritional Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853-4401. 0022-3182/90/2204-0161$02.00/0 © 1990 SOCIETY FOR NUTRITION EDUCATION
161
not designed to capture possible influences beyond those identified a priori by the researchers. Thus, some influences may have been overlooked, especially those that may result from other social and environmental changes. This research was designed to better understand working mothers' food choices by exploring their own perspectives and understandings related to these choices.
METHODS
This research used an inductive and qualitative methodology to probe the subject of working mothers' family food choices (6). The methodology differs from most previous nutrition education research (7), including studies of family food decision-making, because as Rist (8) observes:
Qualitative research is predicated upon the assumption that a method of inner understanding enables a comprehension of human behavior in greater depth than is possible from the study of surface behavior, the focus of quantitative methodologies.
A qualitative approach affords greater validity in delineating characteristics of phenomena (such as food) that have social and psychological as well as physiological dimensions (6).
Group interviews were conducted using focus group techniques (9), coupled with an individual response probing instrument adapted from the Grey Benefit Chain technique (10). Both techniques were pretested with a group of working women to refine them and to identify any biasing influences (11). Rather than using the data to test a priori theory, the women's individual responses were analyzed for themes and then relevant theories were reviewed to identify those useful in explaining the themes observed in the data (12). For the data reported here, a theory from a school of thought in social psychology, called "symbolic interactionism" (13), was felt to be applicable.
162 Kirk & Gillespie / FOOD CHOICES
Population. A purposive sample of thirty-nine working mothers representing a wide range of occupations was interviewed in seven small groups. Each of these groups began with one working mother who was identified through community contacts. This woman was contacted and asked to help identify additional working mothers for the focus group. All participants were mothers in the "young family" stage of the life-cycle (14). Each had at least one child six years of age or younger and no children over sixteen years of age. The stage in the family lifecycle was held constant since this variable can affect: 1) homemakers' views of food consumption activities (14); 2) readiness of family members to receive information related to food decisions (5, 14, 15); 3) amount of time spent in food preparation; and 4) number of family meals eaten together (16).
"Dimensional sampling" (17) was used to sample deliberately populations that varied according to location of residence; thus, mothers living in rural settings or small towns were represented, as well as mothers living in suburban areas. Five focus group sessions, each with six to eight women representing small towns to medium size towns, were completed. Two additional focus groups were conducted with women from suburban households. The participants' ages ranged from twenty-six to fortyfive, and their level of education from high school to one year beyond graduation. Half (53%) of the mothers worked forty or more hours per week. The others worked part time.
Focus group interviews. A phenomenological focus group approach was used to allow the researchers to look at food choices from the vantage points of the working mothers (18). The focus group technique allows members of such a group to discuss their common experiences. Many individuals find security in a group setting, and sharing their experiences can stimulate spontaneous expressions that reveal commonly-held perceptions and emotions. This context can also lead to the chance uncovering of important concepts and understandings shared by members of the group, of which they may not have been consciously aware. Thus, focus groups are an efficient way to obtain insightful data about a topic such as family food choices. In this study, the focus group interviews were tape'recorded so that the discussions could be analyzed in detail later. The focus groups were of the
~
moderated" variety and included acquaintances (ll), since they were formed from people who met the sampling criteria and who were known to the "core" mother.
The focus group discussions centered on the participants' understanding of their own food decision-making processes (19). The primary researcher (Kirk) served as the moderator (ll). She introduced herself as a graduate student and when participants questioned her further, she said that she was interested in food choices. To avoid biasing responses, care was taken not to mention that
the moderator's field was nutrition. The focus group interviews served two purposes. The first was to identify influences on family food decision-making as seen by working mothers. Second, since influences on food decision-making are not something women often talk or think about, the focus group interview helped them consider what influences might affect their own choices, so that they were better prepared to respond meaningfully to the individual probing instrument that was administered later.
The focus group discussion was opened with the question, "When you prepare to make a meal for the family, what factors affect your food choices?" To keep the group moving and on target, the moderator asked participants for detailed explanations on some points raised in the ensuing discussion. Additional questions were also asked about differences in food-choice decisions for breakfast, lunch and supper, and whether these decisions were different on weekdays and weekends. The focus group discussion lasted for 30 to 45 minutes, then participants were asked to complete individual probing instruments.
Probing technique. Immediately after the focus group, the women were each asked to explore their own feelings using a probing instrument modeled after the Grey Benefit Chain technique. The Grey Benefit Chain is a selfadministered probing device that was originally used for sales training and then was adapted for market research (20). Its purpose is to systemically probe product-related attitudes and personal benefits, and how they are linked. Although originally designed for use with large representative samples in marketing, the technique was adapted to small groups for this study.
The specific probing instrument developed for use in this research project consisted of a booklet containing
My five most important It is important for me to consider when considerations making food choices because:
when making food r-------{======== choices are: I I
Figure 1. Grey Benefit Chain Form.
J. ofNutr. Educ. Vol. 22, No.4
three pages with carbon paper between them (Figure 1). It was designed to allow each woman to probe and articulate successively deeper levels of her awareness of factors affecting her food choices. The first page contained the statement: "My five most important considerations when making food choices are: ," which stimulated the respondent to write down five considerations. They were then asked to rank these in order of priority. On the second page was the following statement, "It is important for me to consider (the first page responses) when making food choices because: __ "; the respondents were instructed to write in two reasons for the importance of each of their first responses. This was repeated on a third level by asking the respondents to give two reasons for each of the second level responses. The final result was a chain of data for each working mother that showed the spontaneous and conscious cognitive and emotional responses that each mother associated with her food choices. The data for all respondents showed how responses were linked, the level of probing at which particular types of responses surfaced, and the terms and concepts the respondents themselves used.
Data analysis. The data were analyzed qualitatively, using a thematic content analysis procedure (21) to identify themes that appeared and to assess the commonality of themes from one group to another. To do this the responses to the probing instrument were compiled onto large sheets of paper. The 1,191 usable responses to the probing instrument were then scanned to discern themes or patterns in these data. A tentative set of inductive categories representing the themes thought to be represented in the data based on the initial scan was constructed, and an attempt was made to fit the responses into these categories. Some responses could not be classified by this initial scheme, so the set of categories was modified and another attempt made to classify the responses into the tentative theme categories. This process was repeated until, on the fifth iteration, all the responses were classifiable, and the theme categories were consistent with the empirical responses generated by the probing instrument. Finally, these themes were grouped into eight more general categories, called "nominated inductive categories," for each of the first level and second level responses and ten categories for the third level responses. ~
The next steps in the analysis involved reviewing, synthesizing and evaluating the set of nominated inductive categories according to their inclusiveness and congruence with the variation in the responses. At this time, parts of the audio tapes of the focus group discussions judged to be pertinent to the nominated inductive categories were transcribed. All of the data were re-examined with the set of categories in mind, and further analysis of the second level responses to the probing tool was discontinued because these responses appeared to
August 1990 163
be merely transitional between the straightforward responses in the first level and the more reflective responses in the third level. The nominated inductive categories were refined slightly (now labeled "revised inductive categories") and a quarter of the responses to the probing instrument were categorized by three persons (including Kirk). Interrater differences in classification were negotiated until all three coders were in conceptual agreement. Kirk then finished coding the remainer of the data according to the agreed upon classification.
Within each category, responses were reviewed again to identify internal themes; then each response was grouped into one of these internal themes to arrive at a distribution of reasons for making food choices associated with each of the categories. The transcribed taped discussions were analyzed for verification of these categories and themes. Repeated scanning of all data to identify relationships between inductive categories resulted in more precise definitions of the categories as they were compared and contrasted with each of the other categories. Additional themes that were apparent in the transcripts were noted at this stage. The final number of categories for the first level responses was eight and the third level responses was five. Four additional scannings of the mothers' responses and two reviews of the taped focus group discussions in their entirety were made to verify the distinctions made between categories.
The empirically-based generalizations that emerged from this process were compared and contrasted with deductive generalizations from the relevant literature in education, nutrition education, family studies, and psychology. Theories from symbolic interactionism were identified as useful in explaining these generalizations and relating them to a broader research data base.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The initial responses made by the participants, i. e., those at the first level on the probing instrument, were straightforward and unambiguous and, therefore, easily categorized using thematic content analysis. These were what might be seen as the obvious responses a woman would make when asked what factors affected her food choices. Eight inductive categories were identified in these first level responses when participants were asked to list and prioritize five factors that affected their family mealtime food choices:
1. HEALTH: including physical, mental, and dental. 2. NUTRITION: including nutrition appropriate for age
and well-being. 3. SOCIALIZATION: interaction at mealtime between
family members directed toward adapting children to the family or society.
164 Kirk & Gillespie / FOOD CHOICES
Table 1. Priority ranking of factors influencing working mothers' food choices.
Levelt # of Times' Factors Mentioned First
Nutrition 41 40 Time 32 25 Catering 46 23 Budget 29 5 Management & 24 5
Organization Health 4 3 Season & Weather 4 0 Socialization 2 0
, 39 women each listed 5 factors for a total of 195 2 columns do not add to exactly 100% due to rounding error
4. CATERING TO INDIVIDUAL FAMILY MEMBERS' DESIRES: focusing on providing individual food preferences, variety in food, and moods that affect what will be prepared and/or eaten.
5. BUDGET: relating to money as it applies to utilizing food resources.
6. TIME: relating to convenience and ease of food preparation.
7. MANAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATION: encompassing planning, preparing, or allocating resources other than time and money in relation to food.
8. SEASON AND WEATHER: relating to seasonal foods.
Table 1 presents the priority ranking of the mothers' responses at the first level. Nutrition ranked the highest as a priority, with time and catering receiving the next highest. However, when all the responses were totaled, the most frequently mentioned food choice factor was "catering. "
Perspectives. Third level responses were categorized into perspectives. Based on symbolic interactionist theory (13, 22, 23), perspectives were defined as mental frameworks that involve assumptions, concepts, and ideas that shape the way a person defines particular situations. Symbolic interactionists believe that perspectives have social origins, because acquiring perspectives and other aspects of becoming human are consequences of interacting with other human beings (22). A perspective affects a person's behavior because he or she is seen to act based not on sbme "objective" characteristics of a situation, but rather on how he or she interprets what he or she attends to in that situation. Figure 2 illustrates the human qualities that emerge as human beings interact, and that, in turn, are essential to continued interaction.
In symbolic interaction theory, the self is a process (13), rather than some kind of "thing" as is the ego, super ego, and id in Freudian theory. Possessing a self means that a human can be aware of himself or herself, see himself or herself as possessing certain qualities or hold-
Mothers' Priority Ranking,
Second Third Fourth Fifth
Percent2 of respondents
33 18 13 4 10 18 23 7 35 23 15 33 15 20 21 22
3 15 21 26
3 5 3 0 0 0 3 11 3 0 3 0
ing certain positions (e. g., mother, wife, supervisor, etc.) relative to others, can engage in internal conversation with himself or herself, and can act toward himself or herself; in short, having a sense of who he or she is in particular situations and, on this basis, being able to act toward himself or herself in ways similar to those in which he or she can act toward others. With each position is associated a set of expectations for the behavior of the holder of this position, which is more or less shared with others. This set of expectations is called a role (23).
The self is continually changing as the person moves through the life course and achieves, or is assigned, new or altered positions and, through interacting with others, he or she becomes socialized to accept the expectations that comprise the roles associated with these positions. A working mother must, as a potential holder of many positions, develop this self-conscious and self-reflective capacity to note the expectations (roles) of others toward her as the holder of this particular combination of positions (i. e., working woman, mother, and, often, wife):
From Interaction Comes
/\ Social objects Symbols Language Perspectives
Self Self-definition Self-identity Self-control Self-judgment Self-analysis Self-hood
I~ Mind Roletaking
All of these tools are necessary for human interaction
Figure 2. Human qualities resulting from interaction (22).
J. orNutr. Educ. Vol. 22, No.4 August 1990 165
Table 2. Third level perspectives of 39 women loaded to first level categories.
First Level Manager Categories: Nutritionist Organizer
Health 8 2 Nutrition 105 3 Socialization 0 2 Catering 30 9 Budget 7 12 Time 10 47 Organization & 3 40
Management Season & 8 3
Weather Totals 171 121
a process called "taking the role of the other." She must also note her own expectations of herself in these positions, evaluate her own actions or potential actions in the light of these expectations, and note the anticipated responses of others to potential actions.
As the foregoing might suggest, the roles associated with the positions of working woman, mother, and wife are complex and, therefore, different aspects of these roles can be emphasized by particular working mothers. For example, some might emphasize those aspects of the role that prescribe intellectual stimulation for children, others might emphasize preparing foods that the children find tasty and appealing, and still others might emphasize preparing foods they considered to be nutritious. These differing emphases have behind them differing frameworks for defining situations and thus can be called perspectives. Perspectives are particularly important for the topic of nutrition. For working mothers in this society, choices of particular foods and the ways in which these foods are prepared and presented are influenced by other members of the family with whom they interact, as well as their prior socialization in a family and into particular subcultures. These women's conceptions of how well they fulfill the role of mother (or their identities as mothers) are affected in part by their interpretations of the reactions of other family members to these foods and their own evaluations of it. A mother who emphasizes nutritious foods may perceive herself to be fulfilling the role of mother well, even though her children express displeasure that they are served apples rather than candy for snacks. '
The analysis of the level-three responses to the individual probing tool revealed that the working mothers used several of the five different perspectives identified in this analysis when they made food choices. These perspectives were labeled "nutritionist," "economist," "manager-organizer," "meaning-creator," and "family diplomat." Each of these perspectives is described below. The last two of these perspectives have not been reported in the literature previously. Each mother in the
Third Level Perspectives:
Meaning Family Economist Creator Diplomat
0 0 3 18 5 8 0 4 2 9 58 54
76 7 4 6 14 27
21 12 5
3 0 0
124 100 103
sample used between three and five of these perspectives in making food choices. Their relationship to the first level responses are summarized in Table 2.
Nutritionist perspective. From this perspective, mothers made food choices in relation to some health goal or desire. They made food choices on the basis of health/ food beliefs and monitored the nutritional and/or health status of their families. When talking from the nutritionist perspective, these mothers were disturbed and perplexed by the "scientific community's" lack of consistency. Often they asked, "Whom do we believe about the popular topic of nutrition?" That this question was asked so often by these women may be related to the sample's family-life-cycle stage. Young families are more open to influences that would provide information about appropriate food habits (5). Another explanation may be that the women were expressing the conflict arising in integrating the nutritionist perspective with their own mother identities. For example, their mothers may have served bacon, eggs, cream, and butter frequently for breakfast, so serving these foods became unconsciously identified with being a good mother. But a mother concerned with her family's intake of fat must eschew this breakfast pattern, even though it may be an integral part of this mother's personal identity as a mother.
Economist perspective. Responses judged to be in the economist perspective referred to planning or budgeting, and allocating or adjusting food choices to meet the family income or mother's or family's standards of thrift. The economist perspective overlapped most with the nutritionist and manager/organizer perspectives.
Manager/organizer perspective. Responses also dealt with planning, allocating and/or adjusting food choices according to time and other resources. An example of overlap with the economist perspective was, "It makes me feel better organized if I can spend less." Analysis of the taped focus group discussions revealed "super mother"
166 Kirk & Gillespie I FOOD CHOICES
aspirations attached to this perspective. Mothers talked about the early "working mother stage," when they had been determined to continue performing all the homemaking tasks they had performed when they were not working. "My family was not going to suffer because I worked" was a comment that summarized this attitude. Many of these mothers had eventually adapted by acknowledging to themselves that their energy and time were limited. They modified their mother identities by aspiring to more realistic accomplishments. For example, commercially prepared foods were used for many workday meals, and more elaborate meals and cooking from scratch tended to be done on weekends.
Meaning-creator perspective. An emphasis on organizing family mealtime activities to create meaningful interaction among family members characterized the responses in the meaning-creator perspective. In this perspective, mothers viewed food as a vehicle for bringing family members together, for fostering relationships, and for giving meaning to life. A mother taking this emphasis had an intuitive sense of what food symbolizes, and she made food choices that would actualize those symbols. The mother's emphasis was on using food to create positive, creative, or constructive family interaction. The focus on interaction is consistent with Gillespie and Achterberg's (2) findings on family interaction from a survey of young families.
Responses in the meaning-creator category also revealed conflict and accommodation. Some mothers were concerned that they were failing to create meaningful interaction among family members at mealtime. Most of the mothers had an idealized image of family mealtimes, and they perceived their mealtimes to be at variance with that image. This perspective reflected their striving to achieve a mother identity associated with unselfish giving, creativity, and nurturing of individual and family growth.
Family diplomat perspective. In the meaning-creator perspective, mothers' food choices were made to encourage their families' growth; while in the family diplomat perspective, choices were designed to forestall undesirable forms of family interaction. Mothers' statements on this perspective indicated that one of their main nmctions at mealtime was avoiding hassles in their own and in their family s life by making food choices that were compatible with family tastes and feelings, and thus to avoid mealtime confrontations.
Since the catering responses at the first level in the probing tool were most often linked to the family diplomat and the meaning-creator perspectives at the third level (Table 2), this analysis helps to explain other findings that family food preferences strongly influence mothers' food choices (3-5). It may be that mothers perceive that serving their families the foods they prefer is
a way to prevent family confrontations, and/or create a setting for constructive family interaction. This response, in turn, may conflict with considerations falling into the other three perspectives and so, set the stage for the role conflict which could be a basis for the guilt expressed in the focus' group interviews.
Other influences. In addition to supporting the themes from the content analysis of the probing tool responses, the focus group transcripts revealed additional influences on working mothers' food choices. One set of responses touched on the influence of husbands. The women indicated that their husbands took little responsibility for main meal preparation. Also the women reported that they cooked differently for their families when their husbands were not home for a meal. In a survey of men and women, Schafer and Schafer also found that wives were primarily responsible for family food-related activities, whether or not they worked (24). In the current study, women commented, "[When] I cook what I like or what the kids like ... the meal is a lot simpler. Why make a big fuss when the kids do not appreciate it and are happier with sandwiches?" The implication was that women believed that men expected and/or needed more elaborate meals.
The second important influence inferred from the responses was that many mothers had a sense of guilt about the mealtime activities in their households. Although husbands' influence has been noted in other studies, the role of guilt in mother's food choice has not been studied. Therefore, guilt as an influence on a working mother's food choices is discussed in more depth in the next section.
Guilt. Guilt has been defined by Pinkstaff and Wilkinson (25) as that which:
fills the gap between the values we hold and the realities of the way we actually live our lives. Guilt results when we have done something that we think is wrong or when we fail to do something we think is right. Guilt is the consequence when our behavior is different from our value system.
The literature from human ecology and the women's movement reports that working mothers with small children suffer guilt arising from conflicts between their working and homemaking roles. Roland and Harris (26) explain that working women who were reared by traditional homemakers suffer an inner conflict at an unconscious level when they begin to integrate the maternal and working roles. Their behavior as mothers is contrary to values that were instilled in childhood. Although it is probably an idealized view, they see their mothers as having been better mothers because they did not work outside the home. Thus, internal conflict arises whenever a working mother fails to perform those meal-
J. ofNutr. Educ. Vol. 22, No.4
time activities she associates with being a "good mother." In the current study, the focus group transcripts sug
gest that a major source of guilt for these working mothers were feelings that they were neglecting their children. Many of the mothers experienced that feeling, particularly in the areas of nutrition, family members' eating habits, and their own time management. Many mothers felt they were neglecting their family's health. Conflict arose between providing foods consistent with individual food preferences and providing foods they saw as "nutritious." Eating "fast" foods or other foods they perceived to have little nutritional value generated guilt. Many of these mothers were concerned about the nutritional quality of their families diets.
The next most frequent source of mothers' guilt was their family members' eating habits. In this regard, guilt was often expressed when family members did not eat certain foods the mother had prepared. In several of the focus groups, children's eating habits were discussed. New mothers, in particular, expressed concern about their children's lack of appetite or peculiar food choices.
Guilt was also related to not spending "enough" time with families. Women felt they were neglecting their children by 1) not taking more time to bake "goodies" for the family, 2) not being available after school or on weekends to monitor their children's eating habits, 3) not spending time cooking with the children, 4) not taking time to shop for nutritious foods, or 5) not taking time to plan menus. Many of the mothers reported using food to compensate for their guilt. Some said they gave sweets to their children to make up for their going out "too often" to participate in nighttime activities. They gave their children the foods the children desired as substitutes for their time. On the other hand, some said that they had become more cautious about the foods their families ate.
The guilt related to family meals may result from confllict between the mothers' perceptions of their families' actual mealtimes and their images of the ideal mealtime. In at least two ways this guilt often reflects clashes between making food choices from the nutritionist perspective and from the meaning-creator and family diplomat perspectives. First, the mothers often set serving "nutritious foods" as contrary to family food preferences. Some mothers had a sense of guilt because they seemed to have equated their families' food preferences with poor nutrition. Because they received much conflicting information about nutrition, and possibly because more accurate information was not easily accessible and understandable to them, the mothers may have been unable to determine if the meals they provided their families were nutritious. Second, if a mother's perception of nutritious is synonymous with what she was served in her family of origin, then her meals, in many cases, may not fit that definition of "nutritious."
The conflict between the nutritionist perspective and
August 1990 167
the meaning-creator and family diplomat perspectives was also apparent when mothers observed that their families did not eat the foods they were served. Cooking to meet family food preferences probably elicits expressions of approval from family members that reinforce mothers' feelings that they are being good homemakers (22). In other words, cooking to meet family food preferences sets the stage for positive family interaction (25). Therefore, the mothers may have felt that setting the stage for interaction that would add to their children's growth and development was very important. Hence, their families ate according to their food preferences rather than according to what the mothers perceived to be nutritious foods and, thus, these mothers suffered a sense of guilt because they appreciated this disparity.
CONCLUSIONS
That different perspectives or combinations of perspectives are used by mothers when they make food choices has important implications for nutrition education. Educators who are aware of meaning-creator and family diplomat perspectives on food choice decision making can better target messages toward the predominant perspectives used by participating individuals. Nutrition educators can help women focus not only on the mechanics of meal preparation or rules of mealtimes that are relevant from the nutritionist, manager/organizer, and economist perspectives, but also on the emotional attachments that can be renewed and expressed during family mealtime gatherings, attachments which are the focus of the meaning-creator and family diplomat perspectives.
It is also important that nutrition educators be sensitive to working mothers' guilt related to family food choices. This implies that nutrition educators should present nutrition information in a way that does not add to this guilt, but rather helps working mothers to decrease it. One way to accomplish this goal is to help mothers to realize that meeting family food preferences need not necessarily be contrary to the value they place on good nutrition. It would also be helpful to reinforce what they are already doing correctly. D
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank the working mothers who took time to participate in this study and provide their insights. We would also like to thank Larry Williams for support and guidance in the development of the research protocol; David Deschler for his methodological guidance and his input during data collection and analysis; and Gilbert W. Gillespie Jr. for assistance with the theoretical interpretation and extensive contributions in clarifying explanations of the methods and results in preparing this manuscript.
168 Kirk & Gillespie / FOOD CHOICES
REFERENCES
1 Barnett, R. and C. Baruck. Determinants of fathers' participation in family work. Journal of Marriage and the Family 49:29-32,1987.
2 Gillespie, A. and C. Achterberg. Comparison of family interaction patterns related to food and nutrition. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 89:509--512, 1989.
3 Burt, J.V. and A. A. Hertzler. Parental influence on the child's food preference. Journal of Nutrition Education 10:127-128, 1978.
4 Cosper, B.A. and L. M. Wakefield. Food choices of women. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 66:152-157, 1975.
5 Schafer, R.B. and P.M. Keith. Influences on food decisions across the family life cycle. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 78:460-466, 1981.
6 Lofland, J. and L. Lofland, Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis. Second edition. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Co., Inc., 1984, 186 pp.
7 Gillespie, G. and A. Gillespie. Social science research pespectives and methods applied in nutrition education research. Society for Nutrition Education Abstracts 12:13, 1987.
8 Rist, R.C. On the means of knowing: Qualitative research in education. New York University Education Quarterly 10:4-6, 1979.
9 Morgan, D. and M. Spanish. Focus groups: A new tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Sociology 7:253-270, 1984.
10 Young, S. and B. Feigen. Using the Benefit Chain for improved strategy foundation. Journal of Marketing Research 39:72-74, 1975.
11 Fern, E. The use offocus groups for idea generalization: The effects of group size, acquaintanceship, and moderation on response quantity and quality. Journal of Marketing Research 19:1-13, 1982.
12 Glaser, B. G. and A. L. Strauss. Ground theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine Press, 1967, 271 pp.
13 Blumer, H. Symbolic interaction: Perspective and method. Berkely, CA: University of California Press, 1969, 208 pp.
14 Coughenour, C. M. Functional aspects offood consumption activity and family life cycle stages. Journal of Marriage and the Family 34:656-664, 1972.
15 Green, P. E. and D. S. Tull. Research for marketing decisions. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1978, 673 pp.
16 Ortiz, B., M. MacDonald, N. Ackerman, and K. Goebel. The effects of homemaker's employment on meal preparation time, meals at home, and meals away from home. Home Economics Resource Journal 9:200-206, 1981.
17 Arnold, D.O. Dimensional sampling: An approach for studying a small number of cases. The American Sociologist 5:147-150, 1970.
18 Calder, B. Focus groups and the nature of qualitative marketing research. Journal of Marketing Research 14:353-364, 1977.
19 Wells, W. D. Group Interviewing. In Handbook of marketing research, R. Ferber (eds), New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974, 1432 pp.
20 Feigin, B. Probing the consumers's emotions ... quantitatively. Proceedings 20th annual conference. Advertising Research Foundation, p. 46-48, 1975.
21 Deshler, J.D., J.A. Farmer, J. and P.H. Sheats. Laboratory research on higher education. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1975, 73 pp.
22 Charon, J.M. Symbolic Interactionism: An Introduction, an Interpretation, an Integration. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1979, 193 pp.
23 Linton, R. The study of man: An introduction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1936, 503 pp.
24 Schafer, R.B. and E. Schaer. Relationship between gender and food roles in the family. Journal of Nutrition Education 21:119-126, 1989.
25 Pinkstaff, M.A., and A.B. Wilkinson. Women at work: Overcoming the obstacles. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1979,278 pp.
26 Roland, A. and B. Harris. Career and matherhood - Struggles for a new identity. New York: Human Science Press, 1979,212 pp.
RESUME Vne methode de collecte de donnees en deux etapes (entrevues de groupes suivies d'un approfondissement des reponses par entrevues individuelles) a ete utilisee pour etudier les facteurs influenc;ant les meres travaillant a l' exterieur dans leurs choix d'aliments pour leurs familles. Les donnees ont ete analysees au moyen d'une technique qui regroupe les donnees par theme et au cours de laquelle cinq categories ou profils ont ete identifies. Trois de ceux-ci ont ete sou vent traitees en education en nutrition: profil "de nutritionniste," "d' economiste" et "de gestionnaire-organisateur". Deux profils additionnels ont ete identifies comme facteurs qui peuvent influencer les choix alimentaires des meres travaillant a l' exterieur; profil "de createur de symboles" et "de diplomate familial." Les meres travaillant a l' exterieur ont aussi reveIe des sentiments de culpabilite relies aux activites familiales a I'heure des repas. (JNE 22;161-168, 1990)
Translated by Lise Bertrand
RESUMEN El presente estudio utilizo un metodo de dos etapas para la recoleccion de datos sobre los factores que influyen en la seleccion de los alimentos para la dieta familiar, de un grupo de mujeres que trabajan fuera del hogar. Se llevaron a cabo una serie de entrevistas con la tecnica de grupos de enfoque y con un instrumento de indagacion individual. Los datos se analizaron usando un enfoque de temas y contenidos, a traves de 10 cual se identificaron cinco categorias 0 perspectivas. Tres de estas perspectivas fueron; "nutricionista," "economista" y "administrativa-organizativa"; mismas que han sido las categorias comunmente abordadas en los programas de educacion nutricional. Otras dos perspectivas; "significado-creativo" y "diplomatico familiar"; que afectaron la seleccion de alimentos de las madres trabajadoras, fueron identificadas. Las madres trabajadoras tam bien relataron su experiencia con sentimientos de culpa (culpabilidad) relacionados con las actividades de alimentacion familiar. (JNE 22;161-168, 1990)
Translated by Maria Teresa Cerqueira