<i>Food Choice Motives and the Importance of Family Meals</i>Among Immigrant Mothers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To determine the health and social benefits of the family mealtime, we examined the contribution of immigrant mothers' food motives to the importance placed on family meals, and cultural differences in mothers' food motives and the importance ascribed to family meals. Data were taken from a study on food choice factors among ten- to 12-year-old children from three cultural communities in Montreal. A 24-item, self-administered questionnaire was used to explore food choice motives. Each mother was also asked how important it was for her family to take the time to eat together, and if the child enjoyed sharing meals with his or her family. In all, 209 of the 653 questionnaires distributed were valid; 68 were from Haitian, 75 from Portuguese, and 66 from Vietnamese mothers. Five factors emerging from factor analyses explained 61.67% of the variance. Analysis of variance indicated significant differences between mothers' countries of origin for the importance placed on health, pleasure, familiarity, and ingredient properties (p<0.005). Among Haitian and Portuguese mothers, health motivations emerged as the only significant predictor of the importance given to family meals, whereas for Vietnamese mothers, both health and eating familiar foods were predictors (p<0.05).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".