We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
To examine cross-sectional and longitudinal (one-year follow-up) associations of parental feeding styles with child snacking behaviour and weight in the context of general parenting, taking into account the multidimensionality of the controlling feeding style.
Design
Linear regression analyses were performed. Parents completed a questionnaire to measure five feeding style dimensions (Instrumental Feeding, Emotional Feeding, Encouragement, Overt Control and Covert Control) and children's fruit, energy-dense snack and sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) intakes. Children's height and weight were measured to calculate their BMI Z-scores. Moderation by parenting style was tested by adding interaction terms to the regression analyses.
Setting
Observational study in the Netherlands.
Subjects
Parent–child dyads (n 1275) participating in the INPACT (IVO Nutrition and Physical Activity Child cohorT) study; children were (on average) 9 years of age.
Results
Instrumental Feeding and Emotional Feeding were negatively related to child fruit intake one year later and positively to (changes in) child energy-dense snack intake. Encouragement was negatively related to child energy-dense snacking and SSB intake one year later. Overt Control was cross-sectionally and prospectively related to (changes in) child energy-dense snacking and SSB intake in a negative direction. Covert Control showed similar associations with child energy-dense snacking and SSB intake as Overt Control. Although Covert Control was also positively related to child fruit intake and (changes in) child BMI Z-score, bootstrapping analyses revealed only a differential effect of Overt Control and Covert Control on child BMI Z-score one year later, with Covert Control displaying a stronger, positive association. Moderation analyses showed that some significant associations between parental feeding styles and outcome measures were dependent on the degree of psychological control and behavioural control.
Conclusions
Instrumental Feeding and Emotional Feeding may have a detrimental impact on children's snacking behaviour, while Encouragement, Overt Control and Covert Control may lead to less energy-dense snacking and less SSB intake. Overt Control and Covert Control have differential effects on child BMI Z-score one year later, which supports the idea that they should be treated as separate constructs. Prospective studies with a longer follow-up may elucidate the causal pathways between the various feeding styles and children's snacking behaviour and weight, as well as the moderating influences of psychological and behavioural control.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.