Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Many countries have developed visual displays summarizing key scientific information on diet and health for the general public. The article analyzes the use of metaphors in dietary visual displays in seven countries. The objective is to examine how spatial organization and its graphical representation reflect conceptual organization. It investigates the correspondences between metaphors, schemas and visual depictions in the diagrams vis-a-vis the nutrition concepts they stand for: Do the displays foster understanding of dietary information? Do they support perceptual inferences? Do they facilitate decision-making in food consumption? Several countries around the world are committed to devising dietary strategies that promote and protect health through healthy eating and physical activity. Many of these countries have delineated national dietary goals and nutrition systems in the form of food-based dietary guidelines. Guidelines are educational tools designed to provide practical guidance with the purpose of promoting wellness and preventing chronic diseases among the general public. They synthesize current scientific research as well as national food consumption patterns and policies (e.g., Truswell, 1987; FAO, 1996; Painter, 2002; WHO, 2003). In many cases, they also reflect the influences of the local food industry (Nestle, 2002). National food guidance systems vary according to geography, cultural and ethnical traditions and year of publication.Most systems share a common set of wellness principles that promotes variety in food intake, emphasizing the consumption of fruits, vegetables and grains and limiting the consumption of fats. A recent trend is acknowledgment of different nutritional requirements for different age and gender. For example, the most recent American (USDA, 2005) and Canadian (Health Canada, 2007) food guidance systems offer online tools with personalization of food recommendations. Dietary guidance systems are disseminated in various ways, including brochures, labels with nutrition information on packaging and most recently online resources. Most countries provide a visual display presenting the key concepts. These graphics may considered snap-shots of the dietary guidelines. The World Health Organization (WHO) emphasizes the need for visual graphics by recommending that the guidelines should be accompanied by posters or food selection guides. These visual guides should assist users to select a diet... reflect a concern for promoting food choices ... culturally inclusive and incorporate foods that are generally available.... In addition a guide should based on sound educational principles and accessible to a wide range of educational levels (2003, p. 6). This article examines eight dietary visual displays of seven countries: Australia (figure 7), Canada (figure 5), China (figure 6), Portugal, (figure 2) Sweden (figure 4), the United Kingdom (figure 3) and the United States (figures 7 and 8). Dietary visual displays The graphics examined in this article represent information that is not inherently visible: a healthy diet. The concept of a healthy diet involves many aspects, among them nutrition advice. Because nutrients are a hard concept to grasp, all countries provide information about food, which is a concrete entity. All graphics categorize food according to nutritional properties. Information is presented in the form of food groups (e.g., Milk and Dairy Products). Each group is represented by a selection of food choices (e.g., milk, yogurt, cheese). Quantitative information is measured in terms of recommended daily servings for each group (e.g., gram, ounce, cup). The number of food groups and the suggested servings vary depending on the country and the year of publication (e.g., Truswell, 1987; FAO, 1996; Painter, 2002; WHO, 2003). In the selected food diagrams the country with the largest number of food groups is Portugal, with eight groups. …
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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".