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 investigate students’ tuck shop buying behaviour, choices of lunchbox items and healthy eating perceptions and attitudes at a school with a nutritionally regulated tuck shop and a school with a conventional tuck shop.
Design
Mixed-methods research comprising a cross-sectional survey and focus groups.
Setting
Bloemfontein, South Africa.
Subjects
Randomly selected grade 2 to 7 students from a school with a nutritionally regulated tuck shop (school A; n 116) and a school with a conventional tuck shop (school B; n 141) completed a self-administered questionnaire about perceptions, attitudes, buying behaviours and lunchbox content. Six students per grade (n 72) in each school took part in focus group discussions to further explore concepts pertaining to healthy eating.
Results
In school A, older students had a negative attitude towards their ‘healthy’ tuck shop, while younger students were more positive. School B students were positive towards their conventional tuck shop. In both schools students wanted their tuck shop to allow them to choose from healthy and unhealthy items. School A students mostly bought slushies, iced lollies and baked samoosas, while school B students mostly bought sweets and crisps. The lunchboxes of school A students contained significantly (P<0·05) more healthy items but also significantly more unhealthy items.
Conclusions
A single intervention such as having a nutritionally regulated tuck shop at a primary school cannot advance the healthy school food environment in its totality. A multi-pronged approach is recommended and awareness must be created among all role players, including parents who are responsible for preparing lunchboxes.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.