Background
Method
Study design and setting
Study population and recruitment
The ‘Snack Track School’ intervention
Intervention development
Theoretical basis
Intervention components
Implementation and evaluation of the intervention
Data collection and outcome measurements
Primary outcome measure
Secondary outcome measure
-
Awareness about the healthiness of the adolescents’ snacking and intention to change the snacking behavior within the next six months will be assessed using one question with a five-point answer format.
-
Attitude will be measured with five items in which adolescents’ opinion will be asked on statements linking healthy snacks to taste and health.
-
Self-efficacy will be assessed via three items asking adolescents how hard it is to eat healthy snacks in general and in two more specific situations (at home, and at school).
-
Habit will be assessed by a four-item automaticity subscale (the ‘Self-Report Behavioral Automaticity Index’ [56]) based on the twelve-item Self-Report Habit Index (SRHI) [57]. This subscale was found to be reliable and sensitive to detect the habit-behavior association and moderation of the intention-behavior relationship in energy balance-related behavior domains [56].
-
Knowledge about the healthiness of specific snacks will be measured by means of a scoring test. Adolescents will be asked to rate the healthiness of each FFQ item (28 in total) by giving it a score ranging from 0 to 100. Zero represents “very unhealthy” and 100 “very healthy”. Afterwards the results will be compared with the actual score of the 28 snack items calculated by means of the UK NP Ofcom model [40].
Socio-demographics
Environmental variables/determinants related to dietary behaviors | |
Snack availability at home | The home availability of the 28 snack items used in the FFQ. The constructs of these questions are based on valid questions from the European HELENA study [1]. |
Peer influence | Perceived peers’ snacking behavior, peers’ social support, social pressure, and subjective norm regarding healthy snacks. |
Parental influence | Parents’ modeling, rules at home, and monitoring in relation to snacks. |
Personality traits/biological factors | |
Reward sensitivity and punishment sensitivity | The Dutch child version of the Carver and White’s Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS)/Behavioral Approach System (BAS) - scale as developed by Franken and colleagues [62]. |
Restraint | The five-items subscale restraint from the Child Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (ChEDE-Q [66]). |
Pubertal status | The Pubertal Development Scale [69] which is a five-item self-report questionnaire to ascertain pubertal status in adolescents. |
Other measurements on nutrition behaviors | |
Total energy intake per day | |
Adolescents’ meal patterns: | The frequency of eating breakfast, lunch and dinner, the frequency of snacking, and the source from which they usually obtain the snacks. All questions originate from the validated questionnaires of the European HELENA study [72]. |
Game behavior-related variables | |
Duration and frequency of game play | Duration will be measured via a timeline separately for each day of the week. Frequency will be assessed by using a 7-point Likert scale from ‘almost never’ to ‘almost every day’. Respondents are asked to indicate how often they play games on any device. Both methods have been used in previous studies to measure game use [73]. |
Preferences for game genres | This will be measured separately for computer/console games and smartphone/tablet games. For both categories a list of 13 game genres has been developed based on previous studies and current popular game genres [74, 75]. Given that new games and even new game genres arise every year, the list was updated to the current situation. |
Game motivations | The Uses and Gratifications Questionnaire for game developed by Sherry et al. [76]. |
Game engagement | The Game Engagement Questionnaire of Brockmeyer and colleagues [77]. This validated instrument consists of 19 items from which a total Game Engagement Score can be derived in order to examine one’s involvement in games. |
Game addiction | A 7-item Game Addiction Scale [78] of which each item corresponds with one of the seven criteria for pathological gambling according to the DSM: salience, tolerance, mood modification, withdrawal, relapse, conflict and problems. |
Smartphone and tablet use | Respondents will be asked to indicate whether they use a smartphone or tablet (yes or no). Given that our serious game can be played on either of these devices it is important to take into account previous experience with the devices. |
Structural characteristics | Adolescents will be asked to indicate how important several structural characteristics of video games are for their game experience. King, Delfabbro & Griffiths [79] recently developed a list of game dynamics based on psychological structures. The researchers have analyzed games and made an overview of game dynamics that are engaging to game players, which they tested on a broad sample of various age groups. |
School management questionnaire
Process evaluation
Concept | What/how to measure |
---|---|
1a) Reach (participation rate) Description of who participated and who did not | Schools - describe by type and composition (gender, SES, ethnicity) Adolescents - gender/age/school type/SES Drop-outs - Description of those participating and those not |
2a) Dose delivered (completeness) Implementation of all components | Before the start of the intervention, a presentation will be given to the involved teachers and principals to inform them about the intervention and the weekly process evaluation moments. A weekly process evaluation moment will be conducted in the classroom by the teachers or researchers depending on schools’ and teachers’ preference. During this weekly moment, a classical discussion will be held to evaluate the previous game week, to ask about possible problems, to introduce next week’s week story/challenge and to highlight the importance of continuing with the intervention/game. Weekly logs will be held to capture this process. |
2b) Dose received (exposure) Participants engagement, interaction, initial and/or continued use | Dose received (exposure) will be measured via two ways: 1) the core game module of the game experience questionnaire that will be included in the post-test questionnaire, and 2) the in-game logs. |
2c) Dose received (satisfaction) Satisfaction with intervention | Dose received (satisfaction) will also be measured via the game experience questionnaire. |
3) Fidelity Implemented as planned. | Researcher weekly logs - summary of comments/open ended questions on weekly logs |
3) Context Physical/social/political contextual factors that might influence implementation/reach | School management questionnaire to describe differences in school systems/organizations and priority of nutrition Teacher post intervention questionnaire, Principle post-test, and question in adolescent posttest questionnaire on school related factors likely to influence implementation/contamination |