Kelee Hansen, MBA, RD
Safe Food Institute
(graphic - shows items arranged in an oval, representing: receiving/storage, preparation, cooking, serving/holding, storage, reheating, waste disposal, purchasing)
Direct Observation for Behavioral Studies
(graphic shows items arranged in an oval - receiving/storage, preparation, cooking, serving/holding, storage)
Professionals in getting
people to participate in studies.
Ineligible – no one cooks in the house.
79% of contacts refused. Reasons: In their home, videotaping, etc.
Recruiting firm are very professional and efficient but very costly ($75 per recruit).
By phone by a professional market research firm (Discovery Research).
Random from area phone book (79% refused).
Required that the subject be the primary person responsible for food preparation in the household (8% of contacts ineligible).
13% hit rate.
Prospective subjects were asked if they would agree to prepare a meal in their home while being videotaped.
Also asked to complete a survey.
Under pretense of market research (food kit) to eliminate bias for food safety research.
Incentive offered– food and $50.
Once the subject agreed to participate, a time was set for the session and follow-up materials confirming the appointment were mailed.
Two research assistants to
conduct each session (safety precautions).
(Video technician and food/nutrition assistant.)
Purchased groceries at local markets and stored them in ice chests.
Three cameras were positioned in the kitchen. Cameras wireless, less intrusive in homes.
The other equipment (e.g. video recorder, switcher, receivers) set-up in an adjacent room.
Research Assistant presented overview of study.
Obtained signature on informed consent forms.
Reviewed the recipes.
Answered subject’s questions.
Subjects stored the groceries as usual.
Prepared salad and entree in their preferred sequence.
Handled interruptions as usual.
Notified a Research Assistant
when entrée was finished cooking.
The final internal temperature was measured.
After about 10 minutes into the taping, subjects lightened up, started talking to the assistants, and became less tense about being taped. This helped behaviors return to normal.
Subject plated two servings of the meal and stored the rest as leftovers.
When finished with meal preparation, storage, and cleanup, videotaping was stopped.
Video equipment was stored, temperature data recorded (oven, refrigerator, hot water), and survey was administered.
Subject paid incentive for session completion.
Much of our time spent was in
deciphering the information.
Code for behaviors and failure to do certain behaviors.
Tapes can be recoded for other purposes. Utensil use, efficiency
Wealth of information contained on the videotapes.
Videotapes coded according to Fight BAC!® consumer recommendations and our research model.
Coding completed using a computerized checklist system.
Working directly with consumers is a learning experience and requires ongoing refinement of the methodology.
Currently working on direct observation methodologies for all components of our research model.
Many more food handling
practices to observe.
Direct Observation is necessary.