Social determinants of fruit and vegetable intake and validation of Pro-Children Eating Habits Questionnaire for 3rd and 5th grade children

BACKGROUND: The Pro Children Eating Habits Questionnaire has been evaluated as a valid and reliable tool in Europe to measure determinants of fruit and vegetable intake for children; however, it has not been validation for United States populations. The purpose of this study was to (1) assess the reliability and discrimination validity of fruit and vegetable correlates for the Pro Children Eating Habits Questionnaire; (2) investigate the predictive validity of determinants of fruit and vegetable consumption for multi-ethnic elementary school children; and, (3) to assess the association of social determinants with fruit and vegetable consumption. METHODS: One hundred and thirty elementary school students from the 3rd and 5th grades completed this cross-sectional study. RESULTS: Fruit and vegetable determinants, had satisfactory internal consistencies. No differences were found between the test and the retest for the individual questions with the exception of the question for mean perceived vegetable intake. The discriminatory validity indicated the questionnaire could show differences across grade and gender levels for barriers of fruit and vegetables but not for other factors. Grade together with gender explained barriers to eating fruit and vegetables. Greater availability of fruit in the home and school was associated with higher frequency of consumption. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate the Pro-Children Eating Habits Questionnaire may be a reliable and valid tool for assessing fruit and vegetable consumption of children in the United States.

How effective is the motion-to -suppress safeguard? Judges' perceptions of the suggestiveness and fairness of biased lineup procedures

The motion-to-suppress safeguard is designed to prevent false eyewitness identifications from leading to wrongful convictions. This safeguard is effective only if judges are sensitive to factors that influence lineup suggestiveness. The present study assessed judicial sensitivity to foil, instruction, and presentation biases. Judges $(N=99)$ read a description of a hypothetical crime, perpetrator, and identification procedure, followed by a motion to suppress the identification. Judges completed a questionnaire in which they ruled on the motion and rated the lineup's suggestiveness and fairness. Foil bias and instruction bias influenced judges' rulings and lineup evaluations as predicted. Hypotheses concerning presentation bias were not supported. Results suggest a need to standardize and record identification procedures and to further educate judges about psychological research on eyewitness memory. ^

The refinement and validation of the critical decision making and problem solving scale moral dilema (CDP-MD)

This thesis extended previous research on critical decision making and problem solving by refining and validating a measure designed to assess the use of critical thinking and critical discussion in sociomoral dilemmas. The purpose of this thesis was twofold: 1) to refine the administration of the Critical Thinking Subscale of the CDP to elicit more adequate responses and for purposes of refining the coding and scoring procedures for the total measure, and 2) to collect preliminary data on the initial reliabilities of the measure. Subjects consisted of 40 undergraduate students at Florida International University. Results indicate that the use of longer probes on the Critical Thinking Subscale was more effective in eliciting adequate responses necessary for coding and evaluating the subjects performance. Analyses on the psychometric properties of the measure consisted of test-retest reliability and inter-rater reliability.