No abstract

No abstract

Trust in risk information about food related-hazards may be an important determinant of public reactions to risk information. One of the central questions addressed by the risk communication literature is why some individuals and organizations are trusted as sources of risk information and others are not. Industry and government often lack public trust, whereas other sources (for example, consumer organizations, the quality media, medical doctors) are highly trusted. Problematically, previous surveys and questionnaire studies have utilized questions generated by the investigators themselves to assess public perceptions of trust in different sources. Furthermore, no account of the hazard domain was made. In the first study reported here, semistructured interviewing was used to elicit underpinning constructs determining trust and distrust in different sources providing food-related risk information (n = 35). In the second study, the repertory grid method was used to elicit the terminology that respondents use to distinguish between different potential food-related information sources (n = 3 9 , the data being submitted to generalised Procrustes analysis. The results of the two studies were combined and validated in survey research (n = 888) where factor analysis indicated that knowledge in itself does not lead to trust, but that trusted sources are seen to be characterised by multiple positive attributes. Contrary to previous research, complete freedom does not lead to trust-rather sources which possess moderate accountability are seen to be the most trusted.

Weight management is a dynamic process, with a pre-treatment phase, a treatment (including process) phase and post-treatment maintenance, and where relapse is possible during both the treatment and maintenance.Variability in the statistical power of the studies concerned, heterogeneity in the definitions, the complexity of obesity and treatment success, the constructs and measures used to predict weight loss maintenance, and an appreciation of who, and how many people achieve it, make prediction difficult.In models of weight loss or maintenance: (i) predictors explain up to 20-30% of the variance; (ii) many predictors are the sum of several small constituent variables, each accounting for a smaller proportion of the variance; (iii) correlational or predictive relationships differ across study populations; (iv) interindividual variability in predictors and correlates of outcomes is high; (v) most of the variance remains unexplained.Greater standardisation of predictive constructs and outcome measures, in more clearly defined study populations, tracked longitudinally, is needed better to predict who sustains weight loss.Treatments need to develop a more individualised approach that is sensitive to patients' needs and individual differences, which requires measuring and predicting patterns of intra-individual behaviour variations associated weight loss and its maintenance. This information will help people shape behaviour change solutions to their own lifestyle needs.3

Objectives. This study examined the application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) to two dietary behaviours with a particular focus on the roles of perceived control and self-ef cacy as two components of the perceived behaviouralcontrol construct in the TPB. Methods.A total of 287 members of the general public completed questionnaires, one concerning the in uence of TPB variables on intentions and behaviour for either eating ve portions of fruit and vegetables per day (N 5 144) or eating a low-fat diet (N 5 143), and the second concerning actual eating behaviour one month later. In addition, the individual components of perceived behavioural control (perceived control and self-ef cacy) and their determinant beliefs were examined. Results.For each behaviour, the TPB variables were found to be good predictors of intentions (fat intake, R 2 5 .637; fruit and vegetable intake, R 2 5 .572), although less good at predicting behaviour (fat intake, R 2 5 .185; fruit and vegetable intake, R 2 5 .321), with self-ef cacy being consistently more predictive than perceived control. In addition, examination of their determinant beliefs revealed self-ef cacy and perceived control to have difference bases. The conceptual and empirical distinctions between perceived control and self-ef cacy are discussed.