Efecto de los tratamientos sobre la reproducción de los nematodos

Conceptual Model for Understanding Relationships between Food Environments and Eating Habits

The conceptual model (Figure 3.1) for my dissertation draws upon the following theoretical and conceptual frameworks.

Social Ecological Framework

The social ecological framework (SEF) is a helpful organizing framework for thinking about the variety of determinants that act and interact at the individual, interpersonal,

organizational, community, and public policy levels to influence behavior (McLeroy, Bibeau, Steckler, and Glanz, 1988; Stokols, 1992; Stokols, Pelletier, & Fielding, 1996). The SEF

assumes that behavior both affects, and is affected by, multiple levels of influence; and, behavior both shapes, and is shaped by, environmental factors.

In the case of child care worker behaviors, this theoretical framework considers

influences from the worker (individual-level), the workers’ home and workplace environments, and the larger community as crucial to understanding environmental influences on eating habits among workers. Factors operating at these levels are explained in further detail below.

Social Cognitive Theory

The Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) is a behavioral theory that operates at multiple levels of the social ecological framework (Bandura, 1986). Consistent with the social ecological

23

framework, a key feature of the SCT is reciprocal determinism — the dynamic interplay between behavior, personal factors (sociodemographic characteristics and psychosocial factors) and the social and physical environment, in which behavior influences and is influenced by personal factors and the environment (Bandura, 1986). My dissertation’s conceptual model reflects the triadic dynamic among the three main components of the SCT: behavior, personal factors, and environment. The following discussion organizes these three components by the individual, organizational, and community levels of the SEF.

Individual-level factors

1. Behavior. Individuals’ eating habits (the outcome variable) is the behavior of interest in this study.

2. Personal factors. Eating habits emerge from a host of personal factors, including one’s preferences for particular foods, aversions to certain foods, emotions, and age (Furst, Connors, Bisogni, Sobal, & Falk, 1996). Simultaneously, food environments may affect people differently depending on factors that dictate one’s agency, such as socioeconomic status and transportation mode to work (Ball, Crawford, Timperio, & Salmon, 2010). The conceptual model captures ‘personal factors’ through the individual-level moderating variable to be studied: self- efficacy (confidence) for healthy eating.

Self-efficacy, or confidence in one’s ability to take action and overcome barriers, is a key SCT construct that affects health behavior both directly and by influencing goals, outcome expectations, and perceived sociocultural facilitators and impediments to health-promoting behavior (Bandura, 2004; McAlister, Perry, & Parcel, 2008). Self-efficacy has been shown to be a dominant psychosocial predictor/correlate of dietary intake (Baranowski, Cullen, &

24

Baranowski, 1999; Trapp et al., 2015). Thus, self-efficacy for healthy eating is included as a proposed moderator in the conceptual model (Study Two) and is expected to alter the

strength/direction of associations between food exposures and eating habits, thereby elucidating for whom and under what conditions food exposures and eating habits relate to one another. Other personal factors are included as potential covariates with eating habits and were informed by the literature: workers’ age, gender, race, marital status, highest level of education, and obesity status. These variables are described in detail in both studies.

Organization-level factors

3. Environment. According to the Model of Community Nutrition Environments proposed by Glanz, Sallis, Saelens, and Frank (2005), the food environment consists of three sub-environments: 1) community nutrition environment (e.g., type and location of food outlets, accessibility), 2) organizational nutrition environment (e.g., home, school, work), and 3) consumer nutrition environment (e.g., available healthy options, price, promotion). Home and work nutrition environments are influenced by government regulations, industry policies, and the information environment (e.g., media). Altogether these elements impact individual-level socio- demographics, psychosocial factors, and perceived food environment factors, and ultimately, eating patterns of individuals. The conceptual model for this dissertation showcases a focus on the “community nutrition environment” (i.e., access to food stores, convenience stores, and limited-service restaurants around work, home, and along commutes) via the independent variables.

25

Community-level factors

Community-level factors shape food outlet distribution and access across communities. Community-level factors are captured via the proposed moderators: home and workplace census tract-level poverty (Study Two).

Research Questions

The research questions driving this dissertation are:

Study One: What is the association between child care workers’ eating habits and spatial access to food outlets around home, workplace and along commutes?

Study Two: Do self-efficacy for healthy eating and/or home and workplace census tract- level poverty moderate the relationship between child care workers’ eating habits and spatial access to food outlets around home, workplace and along commutes?

Chapter 4 addresses Study One by assessing main associations between child care workers’ eating habits and spatial access to food outlets (supermarkets, small grocery stores, convenience stores, fast food restaurants) around workers’ home, work, and along commutes. Hypotheses are outlined in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 addresses Study Two by assessing the role of self-efficacy for healthy eating (individual-level moderator) as well as home and workplace census tract-level poverty (community-level moderator) on associations between workers’ eating habits and spatial access to food outlets around workers’ home, work, and along commutes. Hypotheses are outlined in Chapter 5.

26

27

CHAPTER 4. STUDY ONE: MAIN EFFECTS ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN CHILD