ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Children's perspectives on sugary snacks through elicitation techniques - repertory grid and generative method.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sugary snacks are prevalent in children's daily lives and may impact their diet positively or negatively, yet few studies explore children's perceptions and attitudes of these foods from their daily experiences in China. Aims: This study aims to (i) assess children's perceptions and attitudes of sugary snacks and (ii) compare two child-centered elicitation techniques-Repertory Grid Technique (RGT) and Generative Method (GM)-based on Personal Construct Theory (PCT). Methods: A qualitative study was conducted with 31 children (6-10 years old) in Hangzhou and Fuzhou, China. Children participated in RGT (dichotomous comparisons using product cards) and GM (creative expression through drawing/clay) in one-on-one sections. The output of the task was analyzed for thematic analysis and descriptive statistics. Results: Themes identified included sensory, packaging, interaction, emotion, cognition, and socio-culture. Children expressed concern about food composition and showed limited understanding of sugar's functions and cultural significance. The RGT elicited more product attributes (358 vs. 190 in GM), with a significant difference ( Conclusion: The findings highlight that children can be educated about the formulation and cultural aspects of sugary snacks. Encouraging richer "in-mouth" and "in-body" interactive education could be beneficial. Adopting a child-centered approach fosters engaging conversations. RGT efficiently inspires children to generate both concrete and abstract product attributes and is easy to understand but less enjoyable. On the other hand, GM tends to generate more abstract and novel ideas that strongly reflect children's preferences. However, it requires more time and cognitive effort to understand, though it maintains a higher level of enjoyment and engagement. Understanding these findings aids in developing nutrition education that captivates and engages children. Insights into elicitation techniques can guide researchers seeking to understand children's perspectives effectively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.