Socio-demographic and attitudinal determinants of nutrition knowledge of food shoppers in six European countries

Men in the United States suffer more severe chronic conditions, have higher death rates for all 15 leading causes of death, and die nearly 7 yr younger than women. Health-related beliefs and behaviours are important contributors to these differences. Men in the United States are more likely than women to adopt beliefs and behaviours that increase their risks, and are less likely to engage in behaviours that are linked with health and longevity. In an attempt to explain these differences, this paper proposes a relational theory of men's health from a social constructionist and feminist perspective. It suggests that health-related beliefs and behaviours, like other social practices that women and men engage in, are a means for demonstrating femininities and masculinities. In examining constructions of masculinity and health within a relational context, this theory proposes that health behaviours are used in daily interactions in the social structuring of gender and power. It further proposes that the social practices that undermine men's health are often signifiers of masculinity and instruments that men use in the negotiation of social power and status. This paper explores how factors such as ethnicity, economic status, educational level, sexual orientation and social context influence the kind of masculinity that men construct and contribute to differential health risks among men in the United States. It also examines how masculinity and health are constructed in relation to femininities and to institutional structures, such as the health care system. Finally, it explores how social and institutional structures help to sustain and reproduce men's health risks and the social construction of men as the stronger sex.

Subjects were divided into information seekers (high monitors)/information avoiders (low monitors) and distractors (high blunters)/nondistractors (low blunters) on the basis of their scores on a self-report scale to measure coping styles, the Miller Behavioral Style Scale (MBSS). In Experiment 1, subjects were faced with a physically aversive event (the prospect of electric shock). High monitors and low blunters chose to seek out information about its nature and onset whereas low monitors and high blunters chose to distract themselves. This effect was strongest with the blunting dimension. High monitoring and low blunting were also accompanied by sustained high anxiety and arousal. In contrast, low monitors and high blunters were able to relax themselves over time. In Experiment 2, subjects worked on a series of tests that presumably predicted success in college. They could attend as often as they wished to a light that signaled how well they were performing. Results showed that coping-style scores accurately predicted informational strategy, particularly with the monitoring dimension: High monitors tended to look at the light whereas low monitors tended to ignore it. Thus the MBSS measure of coping styles appears to be a valid instrument for predicting behavioral strategies in response to both physical and psychological stressors. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

This paper describes the development of a reliable and valid questionnaire to provide a comprehensive measure of the nutritional knowledge of UK adults. The instrument will help to identify areas of weakness in people's understanding of healthy eating and will also provide useful data for examining the relationship between nutrition knowledge and dietary behaviour which, up until now, has been far from clear. Items were generated paying particular attention to content validity. The initial version of the questionnaire was piloted and assessed on psychometric criteria. Items which did not reach acceptable validity were excluded, and the final 50 item version was administered to two groups differing in nutritional expertise on two occasions to assess the construct validity and test-retest reliability. The questionnaire was developed in 1994 in the UK. Three hundred and ninety-one members of the general public, recruited via their places of work, completed the questionnaire at the piloting stage. The final version was administered to 168 dietetics and computer science students following a university lecture. The internal consistency of each section was high (Cronbach's alpha = 0.70-0.97) and the test-retest reliability was also well above the minimum requirement of 0.7. Nutrition experts scored significantly better than computer experts [F(1167) = 200.5, P<0.001], suggesting good construct validity. The findings demonstrate that the instrument meets psychometric criteria for reliability and construct validity. It should provide a useful scale with which to reassess the relationship between knowledge and dietary behaviour.