Desenvolvimento e validação da Escala de Tendência à Dieta Flexitariana
Palavras-chave:
Dieta baseada em plantas, Padrões dietéticos, Confiabilidade e validade, Alimentação sustentável, Dieta vegetarianaResumo
Objetivo
Este estudo teve como objetivo desenvolver a Escala de Tendência para a Dieta Flexitariana (ETPDF) para medir a inclinação para a dieta flexitariana.
Métodos
Os pesquisadores criaram uma escala de trinta e um rascunhos. Dois itens com menores índices de validade de conteúdo foram excluídos da escala. Um rascunho de vinte e nove itens foi aplicado por meio de uma pesquisa online para coleta de dados. Os voluntários adultos saudáveis compareceram de diferentes sites da Internet na Turquia. Itens da escala medindo a predisposição dos indivíduos a seguir uma dieta flexitariana. Os itens foram avaliados com validade de conteúdo seguindo o método Lawshe. As análises fatoriais confirmatórias foram conduzidas para testar a validade do construto. O coeficiente alfa de Cronbach foi calculado para confiabilidade.
Resultados
Com base nas análises de validação, nenhum item foi excluído do conjunto de itens. Como resultado da análise fatorial, a escala foi dividida em quatro subdimensões (razões econômicas, macroambiente, sustentabilidade ambiental e consumo de carne). O STFLEX desenvolvido mostrou boas estatísticas de conformidade, conforme estabelecido com os índices de ajuste da análise fatorial confirmatória (χ²/df = 1,593, CFI = 0,967, TLI = 0,960, NFI = 0,916, RMSEA = 0,053), alta confiabilidade (α de Cronbach = 0,958).
Conclusão
O STFLEX mostra-se uma ferramenta confiável e válida para mensurar a tendência à dieta flexitariana e pode ser utilizado em estudos.
Downloads
Referências
1. Almeida A, Torres J, Rodrigues I. The impact of meat consumption on human health, the environment and animal welfare: perceptions and knowledge of pre-service teachers. Societies. 2023;13(6):143. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13060143
2. Richi EB, Baumer B, Conrad B, Darioli R, Schmid A, Keller U. Health risks associated with meat consumption: a review of epidemiological studies. Int J Vitam Nutr Res. 2015;85(1-2):70-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1024/0300-9831/a000224
3. Boutron-Ruault M-C, Mesrine S, Pierre F. Meat consumption and health outcomes. In: Mariotti F, editor. Vegetarian and plant-based diets in health and disease prevention. Amsterdam: Academic Press; 2017. p. 197-214 [cited 2024 Jan 7]. Available from: https://shop.elsevier.com/books/vegetarian-and-plantbased-diets-in-health-and-disease-prevention/mariotti/978-0-12-803968-7
4. Corrin T, Papadopoulos A. Understanding the attitudes and perceptions of vegetarian and plant-based diets to shape future health promotion programs. Appetite. 2017;109:40-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.11.018
5. Dakin BC, Ching AE, Teperman E, Klebl C, Moshel M, Bastian B. Prescribing vegetarian or flexitarian diets leads to sustained reduction in meat intake. Appetite. 2021;164:105285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105285
6. Rosenfeld DL. The psychology of vegetarianism: recent advances and future directions. Appetite. 2018;131:125-38. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2018.09.011
7. Oxford English Dictionary. The Definitive Record of the English Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2014 [cited 2024 Jan 7]. Available from: http://www.oed.com
8. Dagevos H. Finding flexitarians: current studies on meat eaters and meat reducers. Trends Food Sci Technol. 2021;114:530-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2021.06.021
9. Derbyshire EJ. Flexitarian diets and health: a review of the evidence-based literature. Front Nutr. 2017;3:55. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2016.00055
10. Wozniak H, Larpin C, Mestral C, Guessous I, Reny J-L, Stringhini S. Vegetarian, pescatarian and flexitarian diets: sociodemographic determinants and association with cardiovascular risk factors in a Swiss urban population. Br J Nutr. 2020;124(8):844-52. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114520001762
11. Dagevos H. Flexibility in the frequency of meat consumption–empirical evidence from the Netherlands. Euro Choices. 2014;13(2):40-5. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692X.12062
12. Malek L, Umberger WJ. How flexible are flexitarians? Examining diversity in dietary patterns, motivations and future intentions. Clean Respons Consum. 2021;3:100038. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clrc.2021.100038
13. Bánáti D. Flexitarianism–the sustainable food consumption? Élelmvizsg Közl. 2022;68(3):4075-91. doi: https://doi.org/10.52091/EVIK-2022/3-6-ENG
14. Dagevos H, Verbeke W. Meat consumption and flexitarianism in the Low Countries. Meat Sci. 2022;192:108894. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2022.108894
15. Benson A, Irdam D, Bulceag I, Barber T. Natcen Social Research. The Food and You Survey [cited 2025 Feb 9]. Available from: https://www.food.gov.uk/sites/default/files/media/document/food-and-you-wave-5-secondary-analysis-current-food-landscape.pdf?utm
16. Rosenfeld DL, Rothgerber H, Tomiyama AJ. From mostly vegetarian to fully vegetarian: meat avoidance and the expression of social identity. Food Qual Prefer. 2020;85:103963. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.103963
17. Bryman A, Cramer D. Quantitative data analysis with SPSS release 10 for Windows: a guide for social scientists. London: Routledge; 2002.
18. SPSS I. IBM SPSS Statistics 22 [Software]. IBM Corp; 2013.
19. Arbuckle J. AMOS 23.0 User’s Guide [Software]. Chicago: IBM SPSS; 2014.
20. Jöreskog KG, Sörbom D. LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Scientific Software International. Washington: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc;1993.
21. Erkorkmaz Ü, Etikan İ, Demir O, Özdamar K, Sanisoğlu SY. Confirmatory factor analysis and fit indices: Review. Turk Klin J Med Sci. 2013;33(1):210-23. doi: https://doi.org/10.5336/medsci.2011-26747
22. Schreiber JB, Nora A, Stage FK, Barlow EA, King J. Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. J Educ Res. 2006;99(6):323-38. doi: https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.99.6.323-338
23. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS, Ullman JB. Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson Boston; 2013.
24. Kalaycı Ş. SPSS uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri: Asil Yayın Dağıtım Ankara. Turkey; 2010.
25. Geiker NRW, Bertram HC, Mejborn H, Dragsted LO, Kristensen L, Carrascal JR, et al. Meat and human health-Current knowledge and research gaps. Foods. 2021;10(7):1556. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10071556
26. Pereira PMdCC, Vicente AFdRB. Meat nutritional composition and nutritive role in the human diet. Meat Sci. 2013;93(3):586-92. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.09.018
27. Givens DI. Saturated fats, dairy foods and cardiovascular health: no longer a curious paradox? Nutr Bull. 2022;47(4):407-22. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/nbu.12585
28. Godfray HCJ, Aveyard P, Garnett T, Hall JW, Key TJ, Lorimer J, et al. Meat consumption, health, and the environment. Science. 2018;361(6399):eaam5324. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aam5324
29. Parlasca MC, Qaim M. Meat consumption and sustainability. Annu Rev Resour Econ. 2022;14:17-41. doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-111820-032340
30. Carfora V, Bertolotti M, Catellani P. Informational and emotional daily messages to reduce red and processed meat consumption. Appetite. 2019;141:104331. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.104331
31. Verain MC, Dagevos H, Jaspers P. Flexitarianism in the Netherlands in the 2010 decade: shifts, consumer segments and motives. Food Qual Prefer. 2022;96:104445. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104445
32. Kemper JA, White SK. Young adults’ experiences with flexitarianism: the 4Cs. Appetite. 2021;160:105073. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2020.105073
33. Collier ES, Oberrauter L-M, Normann A, Norman C, Svensson M, Niimi J, et al. Identifying barriers to decreasing meat consumption and increasing acceptance of meat substitutes among Swedish consumers. Appetite. 2021;167:105643. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105643
34. Raphaely T, Marinova D. Flexitarianism: decarbonising through flexible vegetarianism. Renew Energy. 2014;67:90-6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2013.11.030
35. Ipsos. An exploration into diets around the world [Internet]. United Kingdom: Ipsos; 2018 [cited 2024 Jan 18]. Available from: https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2018-09/an_exploration_into_diets_around_the_world.pdf
36. Bruns A, Nebl J, Jonas W, Hahn A, Schuchardt JP. Nutritional status of flexitarians compared to vegans and omnivores-a cross-sectional pilot study. BMC Nutr. 2023;9(1):140. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40795-023-00799-6
37. Ares G, Machín L, Girona A, Curutchet MR, Giménez A. Comparison of motives underlying food choice and barriers to healthy eating among low medium income consumers in Uruguay. Rev Saúde Pública. 2017;33:e00213315. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-311X00213315
38. Wright KB. Researching Internet-based populations: advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web survey services. JCMC. 2005;10(3):JCMC1034. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00259.x
39. Vasantha Raju N, Harinarayana N, editors. Online survey tools: a case study of Google Forms. National Conference on Scientific, Computational & Information Research Trends in Engineering. GSSS-IETW, Mysore; 2016.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2025 Aylin Bayindir Gümüş, Sevinç Eşer Durmaz, Murat Açik, Ebru Öztürk
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
