Body Appreciation, Eating Behaviors, and Food Liking on Diet Quality in Adult Women (< 40 years old), Qualtric Survey Results
Author
May
Published
October 24, 2024
*** Caren thesis hypotheses
Aim 1: Determine the influence of sweet foods and beverages liking on dietary patterns in young and early adult women Hypothesis 1: The degree of liking for sweet foods and beverages will be negatively associated with added sugars intake and the healthy eating index
Aim 2: Determine the influence of self-body appreciation on dietary patterns in young and early adult women Hypothesis 2: Self-body appreciation will be positively associated with added sugars intake and the healthy eating index
Aim 3: Determine the influence of eating behaviors on dietary patterns in young and early adult women Hypothesis 3.a: Uncontrolled eating score will be negatively associated with added sugars intake and the healthy eating index Hypothesis 3.b: Emotional eating score will be negatively associated with added sugars intake and the healthy eating index score
Hypothesis 3.c: Cognitive restraint score will be positively associated with added sugars intake and the healthy eating index
Aim 4: Determine the interactions across sweet foods and beverages liking, self-body appreciation, and eating behaviors on dietary patterns in young and early adult women Hypothesis 4.a: Self-body appreciation and eating behaviors (uncontrolled eating, emotional eating, and cognitive restraint) will interact with the relationship between sweet foods and beverages liking and added sugars intake Hypothesis 4.b: Self-body appreciation and eating behaviors (uncontrolled eating, emotional eating, and cognitive restraint) will interact with the relationship between sweet foods and beverages liking and the healthy eating index
Load packages and call data
Load packages and call Qualtrics data file
Removed the participants who 1) took less than 15 minutes to complete the survey, and 2) responded that they like “seeing a mouse in their house”/like “being late for an important date”/like “the smell of garbage”/dislike “going on vacation”
Abbreviations: BAS = body appreciation score; BAScat = body appreciation score category, by median; CR = cognitive restraint; CRcat = cognitive restraint, by tertiles; EBs = eating behaviors; EM = emotional eating; EMcat = emotional eating category, by tertiles; SFBL = sweet foods and beverages liking; SFBLcat = sweet foods and beverages liking, by tertiles; sHEI = health eating index; UE = uncontrolled eating; UEcat = uncontrolled eating category, by tertiles; UHF = unhealthy fat liking; UHFcat = unhealthy fat liking, by tertiles
# A tibble: 6 × 2
# Groups: race [6]
race n
<chr> <int>
1 African 109
2 Asian 85
3 European 23
4 Hispanic 27
5 Mixed/Other 13
6 NorAfrican 13
Code
## Counts - by ancestry and agefull.df %>%group_by(race) %>%count()
# A tibble: 6 × 2
# Groups: race [6]
race n
<chr> <int>
1 African 109
2 Asian 85
3 European 23
4 Hispanic 27
5 Mixed/Other 13
6 NorAfrican 13
Code
## Graph full.df %>%group_by(race) %>%count() %>%ggplot(aes(x = race, y = n, fill =as.factor(race))) +geom_bar(stat ="identity", position =position_dodge()) +labs(x ="Ancestry", y ="n") +theme_bw() +theme(strip.text.x =element_text(size =12, face ="bold"))
sugar.logit.M4 <-multinom(SugarCat ~ sfbl.liking*BAS + sfbl.liking*uncontrolled, data = full.df)
# weights: 21 (12 variable)
initial value 296.625318
iter 10 value 270.545821
iter 20 value 258.327530
iter 20 value 258.327530
iter 20 value 258.327530
final value 258.327530
converged
## Model comparisonanova(sugar.logit.M5, sugar.logit.M1)
Likelihood ratio tests of Multinomial Models
Response: SugarCat
Model Resid. df
1 sfbl.liking 536
2 sfbl.liking * BAS + sfbl.liking * uncontrolled + age + hinc 524
Resid. Dev Test Df LR stat. Pr(Chi)
1 529.9835
2 509.3430 1 vs 2 12 20.64053 0.05589867
Code
anova(sugar.logit.M5, sugar.logit.M2)
Likelihood ratio tests of Multinomial Models
Response: SugarCat
Model Resid. df
1 sfbl.liking * BAS 532
2 sfbl.liking * BAS + sfbl.liking * uncontrolled + age + hinc 524
Resid. Dev Test Df LR stat. Pr(Chi)
1 520.5834
2 509.3430 1 vs 2 8 11.24046 0.188443
Code
anova(sugar.logit.M5, sugar.logit.M3)
Likelihood ratio tests of Multinomial Models
Response: SugarCat
Model Resid. df
1 sfbl.liking * uncontrolled 532
2 sfbl.liking * BAS + sfbl.liking * uncontrolled + age + hinc 524
Resid. Dev Test Df LR stat. Pr(Chi)
1 523.9345
2 509.3430 1 vs 2 8 14.5915 0.06759237
Code
anova(sugar.logit.M5, sugar.logit.M4)
Likelihood ratio tests of Multinomial Models
Response: SugarCat
Model Resid. df
1 sfbl.liking * BAS + sfbl.liking * uncontrolled 528
2 sfbl.liking * BAS + sfbl.liking * uncontrolled + age + hinc 524
Resid. Dev Test Df LR stat. Pr(Chi)
1 516.6551
2 509.3430 1 vs 2 4 7.312093 0.1202864