Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      A systematic review of studies using the Food Neophobia Scale: Conclusions from thirty years of studies

      ,
      Food Quality and Preference
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references108

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement

          Systematic reviews should build on a protocol that describes the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of the review; few reviews report whether a protocol exists. Detailed, well-described protocols can facilitate the understanding and appraisal of the review methods, as well as the detection of modifications to methods and selective reporting in completed reviews. We describe the development of a reporting guideline, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015). PRISMA-P consists of a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review. Funders and those commissioning reviews might consider mandating the use of the checklist to facilitate the submission of relevant protocol information in funding applications. Similarly, peer reviewers and editors can use the guidance to gauge the completeness and transparency of a systematic review protocol submitted for publication in a journal or other medium.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Development of a scale to measure the trait of food neophobia in humans

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Food neophobia and 'picky/fussy' eating in children: a review.

              Two factors have been shown to contribute to rejection or acceptance of fruits and vegetables: food neophobia and 'picky/fussy' eating. Food neophobia is generally regarded as the reluctance to eat, or the avoidance of, new foods. In contrast, 'picky/fussy' eaters are usually defined as children who consume an inadequate variety of foods through rejection of a substantial amount of foods that are familiar (as well as unfamiliar) to them. Through understanding the variables which influence the development or expression of these factors (including age, personality, gender, social influences and willingness to try foods) we can further understand the similarities and differences between the two. Due to the inter-relationship between 'picky/fussy' eating and food neophobia, some factors, such as pressure to eat, personality factors, parental practices or feeding styles and social influences, will have similar effects on both magnitude and duration of expression of these behaviours. On the other hand, these constructs may be differentially affected by factors such as age, tactile defensiveness, environment and culture. The effects of these variables are discussed within this review. Behavioural interventions, focusing on early life exposure, could be developed to attenuate food neophobia and 'picky/fussy' eating in children, so promoting the ready acceptance and independent choice of fruits and vegetables.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Food Quality and Preference
                Food Quality and Preference
                Elsevier BV
                09503293
                October 2021
                October 2021
                : 93
                : 104241
                Article
                10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104241
                af657d99-3afa-4381-9000-a8f4a4fa1a3f
                © 2021

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article