Appetite 160 (2021) 105086

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Appetite
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/appet

Is it possible to obtain food consumption information through children’s

drawings? Comparison with the Free Listing
María Cristina Goldner a, b, d, *, Miriam Sosa c, d, Lorena Garitta c, d
a
Instituto de Investigación para La Industria Química (INIQUI), Universidad Nacional de Salta. Av. Bolivia, 5150, Pcia. de Salta, Argentina
b
Instituto de Investigaciones Sensoriales de Alimentos (IISA), Fac. Cs. de La Salud, UNSa, Argentina
c
ISETA-CIC, H. Yrigoyen 901, 9 de Julio, Pcia. de Buenos Aires, Argentina
d
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Argentina

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The aims of this research were 1) to study the children’s drawings to obtain scientific information about food
Children’s drawing consumption; 2) to compare this method with an existing one (Free Listing); and 3) to compare fruits- and
Free listing vegetables-consumed by children of different cultural groups within a same country. Children (n = 105) from
Consumer
two Argentinian cities (Salta in the northwest and 9 de Julio in the Pampean region), reported the fruits and
Cultural groups
Fruit
vegetables they consumed, with the Free Listing and the new Free Drawing methods. Contingency tables were
Vegetable built and cognitive saliency indexes (CSI) were calculated. Children evoked 57 fruits and 54 vegetables by both
methods, which were then grouped into 31 fruit and 27 vegetable categories. The advantages and limitations of
the methods are discussed. Throughout Free Drawing, each food was defined by its name, shape and colour,
which allowed better discrimination between varieties. Children from Salta reported consuming more fruits
(63.7%) and vegetables (68.6%) than those from 9 de Julio (p < 0.05). Differences between cultural groups were
found in 10 fruits and 7 vegetables, mentioned more frequently in Salta, where regional crops arose principally
by Free Listing. The CSI did not depend on the method used but, for vegetables, they were affected by the cultural
group. The fruits with the greatest CSI were banana and apples followed by orange (CSI≥0.19). Tomatoes, carrot
and pumpkins showed the highest CSI in 9 de Julio; while carrot, tomatoes, varieties of lettuce and potatoes had
the highest CSI in Salta (0.17 ≤ CSI≤0.33). Free Drawing is a qualitative alternative to study food consumption in
children populations through a fun activity without the need for assistants.

1. Introduction
Drawing is one of the oldest ways of expression and communication
of the human being (González Pascual, 2006). Children’s drawings have
always been of interest to education and psychology professionals
because the observation and analysis of small children’s drawings make
it possible to obtain information about their social, emotional, physical,
and intellectual development (Farokhi & Hashemi, 2011). In this way,
the drawing technique has been widely used for detecting problems,
difficulties, and disorders. Besides, Thomson, Zakaria, & Radut-Taciu
(2019) used drawings as a tool for studying children’s perceptions of
the scientist and Franquesa-Soler and Serio-Silva (2017) categorized
children’s drawings based on gender, geographic context, and residence
within or outside of protected areas to understand children’s perceptions
and knowledge of endangered primates. Goldner, Lescano, and Armada
(2013) empirically used drawings to study the food habits of children in
the Puna region, who drew 20 dishes and 51 ingredients, 61% of which
were locally produced or acquired in a local market.
There are others methods for studying food habits: the Children’s
Eating Behaviour Questionnaire (Jalkanen et al., 2017), the multiple
response questionnaire (Albashtawy, 2017) or interviews and facial
scale (Hendy et al., 2007). Besides, Free Listing, a simple, qualitative and
powerful technique widely used in anthropology and sociology, was
introduced by Hough and Ferraris (2010) to provide initial insight into a
food quality. Thereafter, others applications of this technique have been
found: Libertino, Ferraris, López-Osorno & Hough (2012), Antmann
et al. (2011), Dos Santos et al. (2015), Ares and Deliza (2010), Ginon,
Ares, Issanchou, Laboissière, & Deliza (2014), Machín, Giménez, Vidal,
and Ares (2014), Muñoz, Fontalba-Navas, Arrebola, & Larrea-Killinger
(2019).

* Corresponding author. Instituto de Investigación para la Industria Química (INIQUI), Universidad Nacional de Salta. Av. Bolivia, 5150, Pcia. de Salta, Argentina.
E-mail addresses: cristigol@gmail.com (M.C. Goldner), miriam@desa.edu.ar (M. Sosa), lorena@desa.edu.ar (L. Garitta).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2020.105086
Received 31 July 2020; Received in revised form 2 November 2020; Accepted 13 December 2020
Available online 29 December 2020
0195-6663/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.C. Goldner et al. Appetite 160 (2021) 105086

As it was thought for the Free Listing, one may wonder whether it is Table 1
possible to obtain information through children’s drawings. Thus, the Description of the research process.
Free Listing method could be used in studies on children because of its Session Researchers Teachers Children
simplicity and compared with an equivalent Free Drawing method.
1 Meeting with
Many cross-cultural studies about food preference, liking or habits LCVEa Program
among different countries has been published (Estay, Pan, Zhong, Cap­ authorities.
itaine, & Guinard, 2019; Laureati et al., 2020; Angka, Hémar-Nicolas, Presenting in
Putri-Hapsari & Olsen, 2019; Sulmont-Rossé et al., 2019; van der Horst, front of directors
and teachers.
Mathias, Pietro-Patron & Alliot, 2019); but little is known about internal Looking for a
differences. Recently, Reddy & van Dam (2020) studied the effect of school which
identity on food practices in a multicultural society such us Singapore. wanted to
They highlight the importance for dietary advice to be sensitive to participate in an
“eating habits”
inter-cultural for food practices. For this reason, research should
research (Salta).
consider variation within a specific country taking into account differ­ Offering a Meeting with
ences in ethnicity, religion and/or dietary habits (Laureati et al., 2020). school, which LCVE Program
Argentina is an extreme case of heterogeneity with respect to social- usually authorities.
cultural matters (Grimson, 2017). On one hand, it was described as a participates in Looking for
studies with scientists who
“melting pot” referring to the white European character of the popula­ consumers, to wanted to
tion. On the other hand, about 56% of the current population has some participate in participate
indigenous ancestry (Grimson, 2017). Therefore, our country would be a “eating habits” studying “eating
good example to be addressed. research (9 de habits”.
Julio).
The aims of this research were 1) to study the children’s drawings to
2 Introducing Asking questions
obtain scientific information about food consumption; 2) to compare teachers to the and agree with the
this method with an existing one (Free Listing); and 3) to compare fruits- project. project.
and vegetables-consumed by children of different cultural groups within 3 Planning the Free Asking questions,
a same country. Listing method. contribution with
suggestions.
4 Planning the Free Asking questions,
2. Materials and methods Drawing method. contribution with
suggestions.
2.1. Participants and procedure 5 Meeting with
parents. Introducing
the project. Written
The population involved children (n = 105, 3rd and 4th form stu­ consent.
dents) attending two state-run schools in two Argentine cities: 1) the city 6 Introducing to the Listening and
of Salta, Salta province, in northwest Argentina (56 children: 24 male, project. asking questions.
32 female, 8–11 years old), and 2) the city of 9 de Julio, Buenos Aires 7 Standing by as Demonstrating how Observing,
back-up support. to make the tasks making practice.
province, in the Pampean region (49 children: 27 male, 22 female, 8–9
(oral).
years old). Parents signed their consent and were informed that no 8 Standing by as Applying the Free Participating in
aspect of any individual child would be studied. back-up support. Listing method. the Free Listing
Argentina is a multicultural country where coexists indigenous Collecting the data. method during
Observing the school hours in
groups, European immigrants (mostly Italy and Spain), and neighbour­
children, assessing the classroom
ing (Bolivia, Paraguay and Chile) and non-neighbouring (Perú) Latin their performance.
American immigration (Domenech, 2003). Salta city is located 1500 km 9 Meeting with the Reporting
to the northwest of Buenos Aires city. It has a population of 618,000 teachers. observations.
inhabitants (INDEC, 2010), with the greatest migratory contribution Receiving the
data.
made by people who come from neighbouring countries, mainly Bolivia.
10 Standing by as Applying the Free Participating in
Northwestern Argentina belongs to the Andean cultural macro-area back-up support. Drawing method. the Free Drawing
(Belotti López de Medina, 2015). The city of 9 de Julio is located 250 Collecting the data. method during
km to the west of Buenos Aires city and it has 48,000 inhabitants Observing the school hours in
children, assessing the classroom.
(INDEC, 2010), whose ethnic origin is mostly white Caucasian. The
their performance.
reason for choosing both cities was that their populations belong to 11 Meeting with the Reporting
different cultural groups (Domenech, 2003). teachers. observations.
The research process is shown in Table 1. It provides information Receiving the
about the role of teachers and their relationship with the research team. data.
12 Processing the
A forgetting period of at least one week elapsed between the free listing
data.
session and the free drawing session. Fruits and vegetables were assessed 13 Reporting Final meeting. Final meeting
individually in a balanced way. This study was approved for the use of general results. Asking questions. with parents.
human subjects by the Bioethics Commission of Facultad de Ciencias de la Interviewing the
researcher.
Salud, UNSa (Res. CD-213-20).
a
LCVE Program: “Programa: los científicos van a las escuelas” (The scientists go
2.2. Free listing method to the school Program).

The Free Listing method involves asking respondents to “list all the X
you know about” where “X” could be film stars, ice-cream brands, col­
ours. In order to familiarize the children with the trial, the teachers and
the experimenters explained this method with “colours”. Then, each
child received a striped sheet that read “Please, list all the colours you
know”. As the order in which they listed the elements was important,
each child was instructed to write one colour below the other (one
element per line). When the method was understood, the instruction for
the Free Listing trial was given:“Please, list all the vegetables you eat (at

2
M.C. Goldner et al.
home, with friends, with family, on birthdays, at school, for Christmas, and so
on, everywhere and at all times)”. The test were individual and the stu­
dents had 10 min to complete them. The same procedure was used with
fruits.
2.3. Free drawing method
The new Free Drawing method involves asking respondents to “draw
all the X you know about” (as it was applied for the Free Listing). The
teachers and experimenters explained the trial, and gave an example
with “animals”. After understanding the method, each child received
blank sheets ad libitum that read “Please, draw all the vegetables you eat (at
home, with friends, with family, on birthdays, at school, for Christmas and so
on, everywhere and at all times)”. Each child was instructed to draw one
vegetable below the other. The time was unlimited and the delivery
times of the first and last respondents were registered. Twelve coloured
crayons were provided. The same procedure was used with fruits. There
is no reference to other applications of this technique in sensory area
because it is a new technique tested in the present research.
2.4. Statistical analysis
When different varieties of the same fruit/vegetable (food) were
evoked, they were grouped into categories. For example, the “tomatoes
category” included “round tomato, cherry tomato, pear tomato”; the
“grapes category” included “white grape, black grape, red grape”. The
plural word was used for this type of category (e.g., “grapes”). When
only one variety was evoked, the singular word was used for this type of
category (e.g., “avocado”).
Contingency tables were built, and the percentages of each category
mention for each city (cultural group) and method (Free Listing/Free
Drawing) were calculated. The Chi2-test was used to study the degree of
association between the cultural group/method and the food category.
The Z-test was used to compare proportions.
For foods in common between cultural groups and methods, the
cognitive salience index (CSI) was calculated (Sutrop, 2001). This index
takes into account the number of subjects and two cognitive parameters:
the frequency of mention of each word and its average position on a list.
The distance between elements on a list would be a natural measure
between them in the mind (Libertino, Ferraris, López Osornio, & Hough,
2012). The differences in the CSI were analysed by ANOVA considering
cultural group, method and food as fixed effects. When significant in­
teractions were found, partitioned ANOVA was performed. The Tukey
test was applied to compare means. Infostat v.2016p (Universidad
Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina), XLSTAT (v. sensory 2018) and Genstat
18th Edition (VSN, International Ltd., Hempstead, UK) statistical soft­
ware were used and a 5% significant level was considered.
3. Results
3.1. Observations
The researchers and teachers registered the following key points
from observations when applying both methods in both cultural groups:
(n◦ 1) “Some children could not remember what they eat”, (n◦ 2) “Chil­
dren recognised more fruits than vegetables because in general the vegetables
are consumed in processed form, such as potato as mashed potatoes and
onion and tomato as sauce”, (n◦ 3)“Some children doubted if the lemon and
the avocado were fruits or vegetables”, (n◦ 4)“They felt pressured because
they do not eat fruit and vegetables”.
Regarding Free Drawing, the observations were as follows:
(n◦ 5) “All children represented fruits and vegetables in perfect conditions,
without any defects such as bruising, splitting, or crushing”, (n◦ 6)“The
children prefer drawing to writing”, (n◦ 7) “In class, we start drawing and
then continue writing”, (n◦ 8) “A student said: This reminds me of kinder­
garten”, (n◦ 9)“They enjoyed this activity”, (n◦ 10) “A girl could not
3
Appetite 160 (2021) 105086
remember the name of a certain fruit (watermelon), but she was able to draw
it”, (n◦ 11) “children drew different varieties by using colours” (See an
example, Fig. 1), (n◦ 12) “Some drawings were difficult to interpret” (See an
example, Fig. 2), (n◦ 13)“A child did not colour the drawings”.
Concerning Free Listing, the following observations were reported:
(n◦ 14) “It was not difficult for the children, but they had little time”,
(n◦ 15) “Several children consume certain fruits or vegetables but they could
not write them”, (n◦ 16) “Few children could not write but waited quietly”,
(n◦ 17)“Children liked the drawing method better, it was more fun”, (n◦ 18)
“They felt pressured because of the time restraint”, (n◦ 19) “They felt it was
an exam”, (n◦ 20) “They were quiet”, (n◦ 21) “They don’t like writing”,
(n◦ 22)“They did not find it difficult because they write faster” [of 4th form
in comparison with 3rd form], (n◦ 23) “Children in 4th form performed the
Free Listing method more easily than those in 3rd form”, (n◦ 24)“We
managed to interpret the fruits and vegetables written despite some spelling
mistakes”.
3.2. General numbers and categories
A total of 111 foods (57 fruits and 54 vegetables) were obtained.
Some foods were only mentioned in Salta: pomegranate, fig, lime,
lemon, avocado, toronja (Citrus paradisi), tanjarina (Citrus unshiu), garlic,
celery, spinach, bean and parsley. Others were only mentioned in 9 de
Julio: blueberry, papaya, nectarine, kumquat and rocket. In addition,
some foods were only evoked by one method: cauliflower, bean, toronja,
papaya and kumquat by Free Listing; and Brazilian pumpkin and
nectarine by Free Drawing. As a result of the classification, 31 fruit
categories and 27 vegetable categories were obtained.
3.3. General differences between cultural groups and methods
Northwestern children reported consuming more fruits and vegeta­
bles than Pampean children (Table 2). Differences between cultural
groups were found in 17 foods more frequently mentioned in Salta.
Regarding the methods, more fruits than vegetables were listed and
more vegetables were drawn (Table 3). In particular, differences in the
mention of 9 fruits and 5 vegetables were found between methods. All
were more frequently listed than drawn except for corn.
3.4. Differences between methods and cultural groups (cities)
Table 4 summarises the number of foods mentioned for both methods
in both cities. It could be observed that, in Salta, the number of foods
was more often reduced to categories because more varieties were
mentioned. In both cities, there were children who did not list any food,
but they were able to draw them. In Salta, the children listed/drew more
than 30 fruits/vegetables. By contrast, in 9 de Julio, the quantities were
lower and similar between methods, around 24–25 (Table 4). For
instance, children from Salta mentioned more varieties of lettuce,
“crespa, perezosa, criolla, morada and repollada”, than did those from 9
de Julio who only reported “lettuce”.
3.4.1. Free listing vs free drawing in each cultural group (Salta and 9 de
Julio)
In Salta, listed vs drawn food proportions were not significant except
for 13 foods (P < 0.05): pineapple, cherry, peaches, raspberry, kiwi,
lemon, tangerine and melons, sweet potato, varieties of lettuce, potato
and parsley, which were listed more frequently than drawn, except for
corn, which was more frequently drawn than listed. In the city of 9 de
Julio, listed vs drawn proportions were not significant except for six
foods: pineapple, peaches, tangerine, melons and tomatoes; all of them
were listed more frequently than drawn, except for tomatoes (P < 0.05).
3.4.2. Free listing method: Salta vs 9 de Julio
Fifty (26 fruits and 24 vegetables) and 43 (22 fruits and 21 vegeta­
bles) food categories were listed in Salta and 9 de Julio, respectively
M.C. Goldner et al. Appetite 160 (2021) 105086

Fig. 1. Example of the Free Drawing method (left; fruits and right: vegetables).

Fig. 2. Example of the Free Drawing method which not represents the objects, fruits (left) and vegetables (right).

(Table 4). Garlic, celery, green beans, spinach, bean, parsley, apricot,
pomegranate, fig, avocado, tanjarina and toronja were only listed in
Salta, with bean, pomegranate, tanjarina and toronja being regional
crops. Eggplant, radish, arugula, cranberry, coconut, papaya and
kumquat were only listed in 9 de Julio.
Differences in the mention of 14 foods were found with the Free
Listing method (Table 5). All were listed more frequently in Salta, which
reinforces the finding that the children from this city who participated in
this research reported consuming more fruits and vegetables.
3.4.3. Free drawing: Salta vs 9 de Julio
Fifty (26 fruits and 24 vegetables) and 36 (19 fruits and 17 vegeta­
bles) food categories were drawn by the children from Salta and 9 de
Julio, respectively (Table 4). Some vegetables were drawn only by
children belonging to one of the studied populations, as follows: garlic,
celery, eggplant, green onion, spinach, avocado, parsley, radish, rasp­
berry, pomegranate, fig, lime and lemon in Salta; and, cucumber, cab­
bage, blueberry and nectarine in 9 de Julio.
For Free Drawing, differences were found in the mention of 14 foods

4
M.C. Goldner et al. Appetite 160 (2021) 105086

Table 2 [F(14,14) = 1.84] and method × vegetable [F(13,13) = 1.83] interactions

General differences between cultural groups. were also non-significant. The principal effect “fruit” was highly sig­
Total % Salta 9 de nificant [F(14,14) = 40.44; P < 0.001]. The principal effect “method” was
(frequency) Julio not significant for the CSI of fruits [F(1,14) = 0.09] and vegetables [F(1,13)
Fruitsa,b 100 (n = 68.6 b (n¼940) 31.4 a (n = 2.87]. Therefore, because no interaction with the method was found
1370) = 430) and no effect of method was detected, the CSI did not depend on the
Amount more 10 (pineapple, plums, method used.
mentioned strawberry, tangerine, The fruits with the greatest CSI were banana, apples and orange
blackberries, orange, pears,
grapefruit, watermelon, grapes)
(CSI≥0.19); strawberry and tangerine had high-intermediate values
Vegetablesa,b 100 (n = 992) 63.7 b (n¼632) 36.3a (n (0.10 ≤ CSI≤0.15); pears, watermelon, grapes, kiwi, peaches and
= 360) pineapple had low-intermediate values (0.03 ≤ CSI≤0.08). Finally,
Amount more 7 (chard, onions, corn, varieties melon, cherry, plums and blackberry had low CSI (≤0.02) (Fig. 3).
mentioned of lettuce, bell peppers, beetroot
Since the CSI for vegetables depended on the cultural group, a par­
and carrot)
titioned ANOVA was performed and it showed highly significant dif­
a
Percentages within rows followed by different letters denote significant ferences in each cultural group [F(13,14) = 59.47; P < 0.001 in 9 de Julio
differences at P < 0.05 according to Z-test. and F(13,14) = 15.05; P < 0.001 in Salta].
b
Number of times each child mentioned a fruit/vegetable.
Regarding the vegetables in 9 de Julio, tomatoes, carrot and pump­
kins showed high CSI (0.17 ≤ CSI≤0.33) and the rest of the vegetables
had low CSI (0.01 ≤ CSI≤0.13). In Salta, carrot, tomatoes, varieties of
Table 3
General differences between Free Listing and Free Drawing methods. lettuce and potato had high CSI (0.17 ≤ CSI≤0.33) and the rest of the
vegetables had low CSI (0.004 ≤ CSI≤0.12).
Total % Free Listing Free
(frequency) Drawing
4. Discussion
Fruitsa,b 100 (n = 56.8b (n¼778) 43.2a (n =
1370) 592)
Amount more 9 (pineapple, peaches, 4.1. About the methods
listed than raspberry, kiwi, lemon,
drawn tangerine, melon, blackberry, This research was conducted to determine whether it is possible to
grapes) obtain scientific information about children’s food consumption by
a,b
Vegetables 100 (n = 992) 49.2a (n = 488) 50.8b
using their drawings, in the same way as it is obtained in adults by using
(n¼504)
Amount more 4 (sweet potato, varieties of the Free Listing method. Bergström, Jonsson, and Shanahan (2010)
listed than lettuce, potato, parsley) discussed methods to study children’s food and eating preferences by
drawn including children as co-researchers. Ten-year-old children used some
Amount more 1 (corn)
methods to obtain information about food and nutrition tasks, which
drawn than
listed
included drawing food events, collecting data through observation in
a
the local supermarkets, interviewing school canteen staff, and photo­
Percentages within rows followed by different letters denote significant graphing food events, among others. The first task was to reflect on
differences at P < 0.05 according to Z-test.
b “what food is”, the second task was to record during one day “what food
Number of times each child listed/drew a fruit/vegetable.
you eat and where, when and with whom”. The data collection methods
most commonly used were sensory tests, field trips, observation and
(Table 5) between cultural groups. All of them were more frequently interviews. The researchers concluded that drawings provided addi­
drawn in Salta except for potato and cherry, indicating that children tional information about food consumption.
reported consuming these foods (Table 5) more often in this region and Gallo, Swaney-Stueve, and Chambers (2017) compared children’s
showing ethnicity differences. liking (aged 7–11) and emotional responses to food images and actual
Each of the methods studied, Free Listing and Free Drawing, yielded foods. For data collecting, children used a computer to answer questions
differences between cultural groups in 14 categories, with 7 categories by selecting words or emojis while being supervised by a moderator. The
coinciding between the methods: onions, beet, carrot, pineapple, plums, study was performed outside the school. Finally, the authors mentioned
grapefruit and grapes. that they had made a questionnaire with follow-up questions about the
study experience but this was not reported. It would be interesting to
3.5. Cognitive saliency index (CSI) know how the children felt during the study outside their habitual
context and with the presence of a moderator. These could be the subject
Twenty-nine foods (15 fruits and 14 vegetables) were mentioned in of study in future research. Moreover, Sharps and Robinson (2016)
both cities by both methods and their CSIs were calculated (Fig. 3). The studied the influence of health vs descriptive social norm-based mes­
ANOVA showed no significant fruit × cultural group [F(14,14) = 1.74] sages on encouraging children to eat more fruit and vegetables. To carry
interaction but significant vegetable × cultural group [F(13,13) = 3.66; P out the experiment and collect the data, participants were led to believe
< 0.05] interaction. Method × cultural group interactions for fruit that the study aimed to identify how people play board games. In
[F(1,14) = 0.67] and vegetables [F(1,13) = 1.63], as well as method × fruit

Table 4
Number of vegetables and fruits mentioned in Salta and 9 de Julio cities by Free Listing and Free Drawing.
Salta 9 de Julio

Free Listing Free Drawing Free Listing Free Drawing

fruits vegetables fruits vegetables fruits vegetables fruits vegetables

Number of foods 33 34 39 44 24 25 24 25
Number of categories 26 24 26 24 22 21 19 17
Number of the children who listed/drew less-more 0–21 1–16 3–18 1–12 0–13 0–10 1–12 1–10

5
M.C. Goldner et al.
Table 5
Differences between cultural groups (Salta and 9 de Julio) by Free Listing and Free Drawing methods respectively.
Free Listing
Total % Salta
(frequency)
Fruitsa,b 100 (n = 778) 69.0b (n¼537)
Amount more listed 7 (pineapple, plums, strawberry, lemon,
than drawn blackberries, grapefruit, grapes)
Amount more drawn
than listed
Vegetablesa,b 100 (n = 488) 62.9b (n¼307)
Amount more listed 7 (chard, onions, varieties of lettuce,
than drawn peppers, beet, tomatoes, carrot)
Amount more drawn
than listed
a
Percentages within rows followed by different letters for each method denote significant differences at P < 0.05 according to Z-test.
b
Number of times each child listed/drew a fruit/vegetable in each cultural group.
contrast, we conduct our research in a regular context for children, the
classroom, accompanied by their teachers, and we did not specify the
goals of our study to the children. We only proposed these tasks as
activities.
4.2. Advantages and limitations of both methods derived from
observations
By experimenting with both methods, we were able to identify some
advantages and drawbacks of each method. The teachers and experi­
menters explained how to perform the tasks by giving an example, but it
was not necessary to help the children to apply the methods. The chil­
dren performed Free Listing and Free Drawing with total autonomy. By
contrast, Estay et al. (2019) analysed children’s vegetable preferences
(5–12 years old) using a 7-point hedonic scale and CATA with 22–24
attributes. Assistants were needed for helping children to perform the
evaluations and the authors suggested future studies taking into account
that a higher number of descriptors would require a higher number of
assistants.
In general, children were able to use both methods properly; some
were not able to list (those who wrote slowly or could not express
themselves in writing yet) but all of them could draw. In fact, drawings
avoid linguistic barriers (Chambers, 1983), and information that is not
achieved by oral/written or conscious form could be obtained from the
drawing (Cabezas López, 2007).
The time alloted for drawing would be sufficient (Einarsdóttir,
2007), and for this reason we allotted time ad libitum, as opposed to the
Free Listing method. The children were allowed to take as long as they
needed to draw the foods and approximately spent 1 h drawing (the first
child handed in the drawing in 35 min and the last one in 60 min). By
contrast, the time allotted to Free Listing does not seem to be
well-defined: 10 min (Libertino et al., 2012), 15 min (Antmann et al.,
2011; Hough & Ferraris, 2010), 30 min (Dos Santos et al., 2015), ad
libitum (Ares & Deliza, 2010) or in some cases it was not informed (Ginon
et al., 2014; Machín et al., 2014; Muñoz et al., 2019). Further research
should be done to assess the effect of time on the CSI and to optimize it
for Free Listing.
The teacher’s and researcher’s observations, n◦ 1, n◦ 2, n◦ 3 and n◦ 4
were related to what consumers (children in this case) include in the
fruit/vegetable categories and to how certain food is typical of such
category (Cliceri, Spinelli, Dinnella, Ares, & Monteleone, 2019). The
cited authors found that salads and boiled vegetables were considered
the most typical of the plant-based dish category, followed by recipes
where vegetables were present as an ingredient coupled by starch-based
ingredients. In the present research, no dry fruits were listed or drawn,
possibly because the children did not include these foods in the fruit
category, as some exemplars of a category could be more typical than
6
Appetite 160 (2021) 105086
Free Drawing
9 de Julio Total % Salta 9 de Julio
(frequency)
31.0a (n = 100 (n = 592) 68.1b (n¼403) 31.9a (n =
241) 189)
7 (pineapple, plums, tangerine, 1 (cherry)
orange, pears, grapefruit, grapes)
37.1a (n = 100 (n = 504) 64.5a (n = 325) 35.5a (n =
181) 179)
5 (broccoli, onions, corn, beet, carrot) 1 (potato)
others (Cliceri et al., 2019). How good an example of the category a food
is differs among individuals based on exposure and knowledge of the
category (Cliceri et al., 2019). These authors also attributed this dif­
ference to some determinants, such us the family resemblance, ideals,
the frequency of instantiation and familiarity. More studies should be
done in order to clarify the relation between these drivers and food
categories in children as well as their effect on the CSI.
The Free Listing method did not allow us to obtain information about
the variety of the object listed, unless it was explicit. For example, if the
word listed was “pepper”, we did not know if it was the red, green or
yellow variety unless it was specified. However, when a child drew a
pepper by depicting its shape, size and colour, a variety was clearly
expressed. With the Free Drawing method, the object was defined by
three dimensions: the name, the shape and the colour, which allowed
better discrimination among varieties. On the contrary, the object was
only defined by its name when Free Listing was applied (Fig. 1).
Another observation that arose from the Free Drawing and not from
the Free Listing method was the appearance of the food related to
observation n◦ 5 (“All children represented fruits and vegetables in perfect
conditions …”). The appearance of fresh fruit and vegetables strongly
affects the consumer’s perceived quality and purchase decisions (Kader,
2002). For example, Jaeger et al. (2018) found that consumers decided
not to buy or eat apples that have internal or external defects. In a
certain way, children as consumers reflected this aspect in their draw­
ings, which could not be appreciated with the Free Listing method.
Observations n◦ 6, n◦ 7, n◦ 8, n◦ 9, n◦ 10 and n◦ 11 derived from the Free
Drawing revealed that school-age children prefer communicating by
means of drawings to communicating by writing (Altay,
Kilicarslan-Toruner, & Sari, 2017; Durualp & Altay, 2012) because
drawing is a natural and spontaneous childhood activity that does not
require training, and it elicits participation and enhances enjoyment
(Saneei & Haghayegh, 2011). These observations showed that the
drawing task contributed to engaging the students in the activity, and it
is known that keeping children engaged and attentive during a task
should be carefully planned by the experimenters (Gallo et al., 2017).
For this reason, the adult researcher must be open to the use of methods
that are suitable to a child’s level of understanding and interest (Greene
& Hogan, 2005).
Observations n◦ 14 to n◦ 21, derived from Free Listing, were in line
with the fact that children dislike answering questions, and that drawing
tests can be easy and enjoyable to them (Lewis & Greene, 1983).
Nevertheless, observations n◦ 22 and n◦ 23 denoted differences in listing
between primary school forms because of their different competence in
writing. For instance, 3rd form children were able to write 30 letters/­
min and 4th form children 40 letters/min (Perea Ortega & Perea Ortega,
2013–2014).
Observation n◦ 24 revealed an important advantage noted when
M.C. Goldner et al. Appetite 160 (2021) 105086

Fig. 3. Cognitive salience index mean values of the fruit and vegetable category.

applying Free Listing: a child wrote “sapayo” (misspelled Spanish word
for pumpkin), but we clearly inferred that he meant “zapallo”; the
spelling mistakes were not a barrier to interpreting what the child
meant.
When applying the Free Drawing method, we detected some limi­
tations and two cases are worth mentioning. The example observed in
Fig. 2 (Observation n◦ 12) shows difficulties in interpreting certain
drawings. In this case, a child drew and coloured geometric figures.
Allen, Nurmsoo, and Freeman (2016) argued that the content of a
drawing is often ambiguous, as its elements are plurifunctional because
children could be representationally flexible and their drawings are
influenced by inner (such us species-specific readiness, maturation, age,

7
M.C. Goldner et al.
intelligence, motivation, psychology) and external factors (such us
family, school, socioeconomic and cultural status) (Oğuz, 2010).
Therefore, this was a particular case where the drawings were not
graphic representations, that is, the picture did not represent the objects
(Drake & Winner, 2012).
The second case is noteworthy because a boy did not colour his
drawings (Observation n◦ 13). Could one attribute this behaviour to
boredom, tiredness or lack of interest, commitment, or anxiety? Interest
in painting and willingness to create and spend time drawing and
making an effort are affective factors in children’s painting and moti­
vation (Oğuz, 2010). Moreover, high levels of excitement and anxiety
may not reflect the ideas that the children aim to express by drawing
(Oğuz, 2010). These two cases were not analysed in depth given that it
was not the object of the present research to study particular cases.
Adapting a method or a scale to children to obtain information has
also been a subject of study since young children are unable to under­
stand questions that are too abstract or too complex (Greene & Hogan,
2005). The Food Neophobia Scale (Pliner, 1994) and the Emotional
Eating Scale (Limbers, Young, & Beaujean, 2016) are examples of such
adaptations. However, Limbers et al. (2016) found the same limitations
in adapting a method to children: it is a self-report measure that does not
involve parents. Our study did not involve parents either, and this would
be necessary to confirm the information provided by the children (Pli­
ner, 1994; Rioux, Lafraire, & Picard, 2017).
4.3. Fruits and vegetables mentioned by children: cultural groups
Substantial research has focused on dietary habits in childhood in
order to promote healthy nutrition (Allirot, Maiz, & Urdaneta, 2018;
Cooke et al., 2004; Jester, Kreider, Ochberg, & Meek, 2018; Maiz, Urkia,
Bereciartu, Urdaneta, & Allirot, 2019; van der Horst, Mathias, Prieto
Patron, & Allirot, 2019). Cooke et al. (2004) found predictors of chil­
dren’s fruit and vegetable intake; mother’s educational level and chil­
dren’s age and gender were associated with children’s vegetable
consumption, and ethnicity was associated with fruit consumption. Our
results consistently showed ethnic differences since northwestern chil­
dren reported consuming more fruits and vegetables. Estay et al. (2019)
studied how similar vegetable liking by children is to their peers’, sib­
lings’, and mothers’ in three countries, China, Chile and the United
States, by rating their degree of liking in a 7-point hedonic scale where
children used emoji faces. This was an important study including a South
American country where cultural factor was taken into account.
Argentina is a very extensive country where native people and European
descendants coexist, resulting in different internal food cultures, which
means cultural differences within the same country. This was reflected
in the mentions of regional crops in Salta. Also, Laureati et al. (2020)
conducted a work in six European countries, but affirmed that research
should consider variation within specific country as it was shown in the
present research.
Family socioeconomic position is another factor affecting food intake
(Brug, Tak, te Velde, Bere, & de Bourdeaudhuij, 2008). Concerning the
populations that participated in the present study, it is important to
highlight that the neighbourhood where the school of Salta is located
had 5.1% of homes with unsatisfied basic needs (Estadísticas, 2015)
where it is the mother who takes care of the children and cooks, and
consequently, involves them in culinary tasks. It has been proven that
involving children in the task of cooking increases vegetable consump­
tion (van der Horst, Ferrage, & Rytz, 2014). Nevertheless, only 4.8% of
the Argentinian population consumes the recommended amount of five
portions or more of fruits and vegetables daily (Murray, 2016, p. 14),
and in the last 20 years, the consumption has considerably decreased;
Argentinians consumed 41% fewer fruits and 13% fewer vegetables in
2012–13 than in 1996–97 (Rovirosa, 2016, p. 10). Recently, the 2nd
National Survey of Nutrition and Health found that the proportion of the
population that reported having consumed the recommended foods
daily, such as fresh fruits and vegetables, meat, milk, yogurt and cheese,
8
Appetite 160 (2021) 105086
was below the consumption recommendations, the case of fruits and
vegetables being more remarkable (Salud, 2019).
In this research, we registered 29 foods in common across two
methods and two cultural groups. Within this group, five vegetables
(tomato, onion, carrot, pumpkin and lettuce) and four fruits (orange,
banana, apple and tangerine) constitute two-thirds of Argentinians’
basic fruit and vegetable consumption (Rovirosa, 2016, p. 10). Besides,
the National Survey of Household Expenses (1996–97, 2004–05 and
2012–13) showed that tomatoes were the most widely consumed veg­
etables followed by carrot, pumpkin and onion (Rovirosa, 2016, p. 10)
in children from school age onwards, this was reflected by the high CSI
of tomatoes in both cities.
However, some differences were found in terms of food consump­
tion. In fact, feeding is directly related to the environment. The food
obtained or produced in any cultural context is tightly related to the
environmental conditions: ground quality, relief, water availability,
weather factors and wildlife. For this reason, the environment affects the
design and structure of the feeding model adopted by populations
(Santoni & Torres, 2002).
Angka, Hémar-Nicolas, Valerie, Putri, and Olsen (2020) studied how
packaging colours and claims affect children’s vegetable attitude using
the cucumber as the stimulus because it is a “common vegetable” for the
two participating cultural groups. Estay et al. (2019) choose vegetables
“based on what was familiar” for each studied country. Laureati et al.
(2020) validated a child-friendly questionnaire to investigate texture
preferences. One limitation was that the familiarity has been assessed as
a binary answer. Our research highlights and considers the CSI for the
selection of the “common or familiar” foods in eating habit research.
To conclude, the novel Free Drawing method revealed that each food
was defined by the name, shape and colour, which allowed better
discrimination between varieties. This method allowed us to obtain in­
formation similar to that obtained through “Free Listing” in most of the
fruits and vegetables, but some limitations were observed in terms on
unclear drawings. In addition, the CSI did not depend on the method
applied, and therefore Free Drawing would be a qualitative alternative
to study food consumption in children’s population through a fun
method without the need for assistants.
Differences were found in the cultural groups, with children from the
city of Salta reporting consumption of more fruits and vegetables than
those from the city of 9 de Julio and mentioning typical fruits and
vegetables cultivated in Salta. Therefore, the differences in cultural
groups lead to differences in food consumption. This was observed by
both methods.
As it seems that there is not an indicator of what is familiar or
common foods, we propose the CSI as a criterion to select usual/non-
usual food of a population for future studies. This topic would be ana­
lysed in depth.
Our findings suggest that children can offer information about food
preferences through their drawings as a communication media. It is
possible to study children’s food consumption through the drawings,
much in the way that Free Listing does in adults. Then, we suggest to use
the Free Drawing instead of the Free Listing when working with chil­
dren. This is pioneering research about the relation between food con­
sumption and children’s drawing that yielded encouraging results.
Author contributions
Dra. M.C. Goldner performed the activities in Salta and wrote the
manuscript. Dra. Sosa and Dra. Garitta performed the activities in 9 de
Julio, read the manuscript and made important contributions. All au­
thors approved the final article.
Funding
This work was supported by the CONICET (PIP 2014–2016 n◦ 224),
“Los científicos van a las escuelas” Program (LCVE 2015), “Elaboración de
M.C. Goldner et al. Appetite 160 (2021) 105086

bebidas saludables a base de frutas y verduras. Estudio del nivel de agrado en Farokhi, M., & Hashemi, M. (2011). The analysis of children’s drawings: Social,
emotional, physical, and psychological aspects. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
niños de la escuela primaria” Project and the FONCyT (PICT 2016–604).
Sciences, 30(Supplement C), 2219–2224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
sbspro.2011.10.433
Franquesa-Soler, M., & Serio-Silva, J. C. (2017). Through the eyes of children: Drawings
Declaration of competing interest as an evaluation tool for children’s understanding about endangered Mexican
primates. American Journal of Primatology, 79(12). https://doi.org/10.1002/
None. ajp.22723
Gallo, K. E., Swaney-Stueve, M., & Chambers, D. H. (2017). Comparing visual food
images versus actual food when measuring emotional response of children. Journal
Acknowledgements of Sensory Studies, 32(3), Article e12267. https://doi.org/10.1111/joss.12267
Goldner, M. C., Lescano, G., & Armada, M. (2013). Food menus evaluation for most liked
products in children from Puna, region of Argentina. Appetite, 61, 66–76. https://doi.
Special thanks to the teachers, authorities, parents, and students of org/10.1016/j.appet.2012.10.022
Escuela n◦ 4643 Joaquín Castellanos, Salta Province and Escuela n◦ 1 González Pascual, R. (2006). Análisis del dibujo infantil. Revista digital investigación y
Bernardino Rivadavia, 9 de Julio, Buenos Aires Province. The authors educación, 23, 1–13.
Greene, S., & Hogan, D. (2005). Researching children’s experience. Approaches and methods.
acknowledge Lic. Alejandra Scotti for the language assistance.
London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
Grimson, A. (2017). Social and cultural diversity in Argentina. Global Dialogue. Magazine
References of the International Sociological Association, 7(4), 35–37.
Hendy, H. M., Williams, K. E., Camise, T. S., Alderman, S., Ivy, J., & Reed, J. (2007).
Overweight and average-weight children equally responsive to "Kids Choice
Albashtawy, M. (2017). Breakfast eating habits among schoolchildren. Journal of
Program" to increase fruit and vegetable consumption. Appetite, 49(3), 683–686.
Pediatric Nursing, 36, 118–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2017.05.013
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2007.06.003
Allen, M. L., Nurmsoo, E., & Freeman, N. (2016). Young children show representational
van der Horst, K., Ferrage, A., & Rytz, A. (2014). Involving children in meal preparation.
flexibility when interpreting drawings. Cognition, 147, 21–28. https://doi.org/
Effects on food intake. Appetite, 79, 18–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
10.1016/j.cognition.2015.11.003
appet.2014.03.030
Allirot, X., Maiz, E., & Urdaneta, E. (2018). Shopping for food with children: A strategy
van der Horst, K., Mathias, K. C., Prieto Patron, A., & Allirot, X. (2019). Art on a plate: A
for directing their choices toward novel foods containing vegetables. Appetite, 120,
pilot evaluation of an international initiative designed to promote consumption of
287–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.09.008
fruits and vegetables by children. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior. https://
Altay, N., Kilicarslan-Toruner, E., & Sari, Ç. (2017). The effect of drawing and writing
doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2019.03.009
technique on the anxiety level of children undergoing cancer treatment. European
Hough, G., & Ferraris, D. (2010). Free listing: A method to gain initial insight of a food
Journal of Oncology Nursing, 28, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2017.02.007
category. Food Quality and Preference, 21(3), 295–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Angka, S., Hémar-Nicolas, Valerie, H., Putri, H., & Olsen, A. (2020). How packaging
foodqual.2009.04.001
colours and claims influence children’s vegetable attitude and intake – an
INDEC. (2010). Censo nacional de Población, hogares y viviendas 2001-2010.
exploratory cross-cultural comparison between Indonesia and Denmark. Food Quality
Jaeger, S. R., Machín, L., Aschemann-Witzel, Jessica, A., Lucía, H., Roger, F., et al.
and Preference, 79, 103795. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.103795
(2018). Buy, eat or discard? A case study with apples to explore fruit quality
Antmann, G., Ares, G., Varela, P., Salvador, A., Coste, B., & Fiszman, S. M. (2011).
perception and food waste. Food Quality and Preference, 69, 10–20. https://doi.org/
Consumers’ texture vocabulary: Results from a free listing study in three Spanish-
10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.05.004
speaking countries. Food Quality and Preference, 22(1), 165–172. https://doi.org/
Jalkanen, H., Lindi, V., Schwab, U., Kiiskinen, S., Venäläinen, T., Karhunen, L., …
10.1016/j.foodqual.2010.09.007
Eloranta, A. M. (2017). Eating behaviour is associated with eating frequency and
Ares, G., & Deliza, R. (2010). Identifying important package features of milk desserts
food consumption in 6–8 year-old children: The Physical Activity and Nutrition in
using free listing and word association. Food Quality and Preference, 21(6), 621–628.
Children (PANIC) study. Appetite, 114, 28–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2010.03.010
appet.2017.03.011
Bergström, K., Jonsson, L., & Shanahan, H. (2010). Children as co-researchers voicing
Jester, A., Kreider, K. E., Ochberg, R., & Meek, J. (2018). Effectiveness of implementing
their preferences in foods and eating: Methodological reflections. International
initial education strategies to promote awareness and healthy habits in childhood
Journal of Consumer Studies, 34(2), 183–189. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-
obesity: A quality improvement Project. Journal of Pediatric Health Care, 32(2),
6431.2009.00843.x
157–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedhc.2017.09.006
Brug, J., Tak, N. I., te Velde, Saskia, J., Bere, E., de Bourdeaudhuij, et al. (2008). Taste
Kader, A. A. (2002). In Postharvest technology of horticultual crops (3 ed., p. 3311). Daves
preferences, liking and other factors related to fruit and vegetable intakes among
CA: University of California: ANR Publication.
schoolchildren: Results from observational studies. British Journal of Nutrition, 99
Laureati, M., Sandvik, P. L., Almli, V., Sandell, M., Zeinstra, G. G., Methven, L., …
(S1), S7–S14. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114508892458
Proserpio, C. (2020). Individual differences in texture preferences among European
Cabezas López, C. (2007). Análisis y características del dibujo infantil. España: Ittakus.
children: Development and validation of the child food texture preference
Chambers, D. W. (1983). Stereotypic images of the scientist: The draw A scientist test.
questionnaire (CFTPQ). Food Quality and Preference, 80, Article 103828. https://doi.
Science Education, 67, 255–265.
org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.103828
Cliceri, D., Spinelli, S., Dinnella, C., Ares, G., & Monteleone, E. (2019). Consumer
Lewis, D., & Greene, J. (1983). Your child’s drawing. Their hidden meaning. London:
categorization of plant-based dishes: Implications for promoting vegetable
hutchinson.
consumption. Food Quality and Preference, 76, 133–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Libertino, L., Ferraris, D., López Osornio, M. M., & Hough, G. (2012). Analysis of data
foodqual.2019.04.002
from a free-listing study of menus by different income-level populations. Food
Cooke, L. J., Wardle, J., Gibson, E. L., Sapochnik, M., Sheiham, A., & Lawson, M. (2004).
Quality and Preference, 24(2), 269–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Demographic, familial and trait predictors of fruit and vegetable consumption by
foodqual.2011.11.003
pre-school children. Public Health Nutrition, 7(2), 295–302. https://doi.org/10.1079/
Limbers, C. A., Young, D., & Beaujean, A. A. (2016). The Emotional Eating Scale adapted
phn2003527
for children and adolescents: Factorial invariance across adolescent males and
Domenech, E. E. (2003). El multiculturalismo en Argentina: Ausencias, ambigüedades y
females. Eating Behaviors, 22, 164–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
acusaciones. Estudios, 14, 33–47.
eatbeh.2016.06.012
Dos Santos, B. A., Bastianello Campagnol, P. C., da Cruz, A. G., Galvão, M. T. E. L.,
López de Medina, B., & Raúl, C. (2015). Subsistence and economy at the Calchaquí valley
Monteiro, R. A., Wagner, R., et al. (2015). Check all that apply and free listing to
(Salta, Argentina) during the regional developments period (ca. 1000-1430 AD):
describe the sensory characteristics of low sodium dry fermented sausages:
Zooarchaeology of las pailas locality. Journal of Archaeological Science: Report, 4,
Comparison with trained panel. Food Research International, 76, 725–734. https://
461–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2015.10.016
doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2015.06.035
Machín, L., Giménez, A., Vidal, L., & Ares, G. (2014). Influence of context on motives
Drake, J. E., & Winner, E. (2012). Children gifted in drawing: The incidence of
underlying food Choice. Journal of Sensory Studies, 29(5), 313–324. https://doi.org/
precocious realism. Gifted Education International, 29, 125–139.
10.1111/joss.12107
Durualp, E., & Altay, N. (2012). A comparison of emotional indicators and depressive
Maiz, E., Urkia, I., Bereciartu, A., Urdaneta, E., & Allirot, X. (2019). Introducing novel
symptom levels of school-age children with and without cancer. Journal of Pediatric
fruits and vegetables: Effects of involving children in artistic plating of food. Food
Oncology Nursing, 29(4), 232–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043454212446616
Quality and Preference, 77, 172–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Einarsdóttir, J. (2007). Research with children: Methodological and ethical challenges.
foodqual.2019.05.006
European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 15(2), 197–211. https://doi.
Muñoz, A., Fontalba-Navas, Andrés, A., Pedro, J., Larrea-Killinger, & Cristina. (2019).
org/10.1080/13502930701321477
Trust and distrust in relation to food risks in Spain: An approach to the socio-cultural
Emilie, G., Gastón, A., Issanchou, S., Lúcia Helena Esteves dos Santos, L., & Deliza, R.
representations of pregnant and breastfeeding women through the technique of free
(2014). Identifying motives underlying wine purchase decisions: Results from an
listing. Appetite, 142, Article 104365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.104365
exploratory free listing task with Burgundy wine consumers. Food Research
Murray, S. R. E., Ridner, E., Munner, M., Marzó, A., & Rovirosa, A. (2016). Estudio
International, 62, 860–867. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2014.04.052
hábitos de vida en Argentina y su relación con las enfermedades prevenibles. In
Estadísticas, Dirección General de. (2015). Anuario 2015 avance 2016. Indicadores de
Coordinadora de las Industrias de Productos Alimenticios.
Pobreza. Gobierno de la Provincia de Salta.
Oğuz, V. (2010). The factors influencing childrens’ drawings. Procedia - Social and
Estay, K., Pan, S., Zhong, F., Capitaine, C., & Guinard, J.-X. (2019). A cross-cultural
Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 3003–3007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.455
analysis of children’s vegetable preferences. Appetite, 142, 104346. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.appet.2019.104346

9
M.C. Goldner et al.
Perea Ortega, A. J., & Perea Ortega, M. A. (2013-2014). Desarrollo didáctico de la
escritura. CAUCE. Revista Internacional de Filología. Comunicación y sus didácticas,
36–37, 237–250.
Pliner, P. (1994). Development of measures of food neophobia in children. Appetite, 23
(2), 147–163. https://doi.org/10.1006/appe.1994.1043
Reddy, G., van Dam, & Rob, M. (2020). Food, culture, and identity in multicultural
societies: Insights from Singapore. Appetite, 149, Article 104633. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.appet.2020.104633
Rioux, C., Lafraire, J., & Picard, D. (2017). The Child Food Rejection Scale: Development
and validation of a new scale to assess food neophobia and pickiness among 2- to 7-
year-old French children. Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée/European Review
of Applied Psychology, 67(2), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2017.01.003
Rovirosa, A. (2016). Consumo de frutas y vegetales de la población Argentina. Observatorio
de la situación nutricional.
Salud, S.de G.de (2019). 2◦ encuesta Nacional de nutrición y Salud. Resumen ejecutivo. Rep.
Argentina. Ministerio de Salud y Desarrollo Social.
10
Appetite 160 (2021) 105086
Saneei, A., & Haghayegh, S. A. (2011). Family drawings of Iranian children with autism
and their family members. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 38(5), 333–339. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.aip.2011.09.004
Santoni, M. E., & Torres, G. F. (2002). In El sabor de los pucheros La cocina como patrimonio
(in)tangible (1 ed., pp. 87–106). Comisión para la Preservación del Patrimonio
Histórico Cultural de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires.
Sharps, M., & Robinson, E. (2016). Encouraging children to eat more fruit and
vegetables: Health vs. descriptive social norm-based messages. Appetite, 100, 18–25.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.01.031
Sulmont-Rossé, Claire, D., Rafal, A., Valérie, L., van Zyl, Hannelize, S., et al. (2019).
A cross-cultural perspective on feeling good in the context of foods and beverages.
Food Research International, 115, 292–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodres.2018.12.012
Sutrop, U. (2001). List task and a congnitive slience index. Field Methods, 13, 206–276.
Thomson, M. M., Zakaria, Z., Radut-Taciu, & Ramona. (2019). Perceptions of scientists
and stereotypes through the eyes of young school children. Educational Research
International. , Article 6324704. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6324704, 2019.