Matching Items (2)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

280-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

Programs such as the Healthy Corner Store Initiative have been widely adopted in recent years to increase the availability of healthy foods in small retail food stores. Valid and reliable measures are necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of these programs. The validated instruments currently available for assessments require in-person evaluations,

Programs such as the Healthy Corner Store Initiative have been widely adopted in recent years to increase the availability of healthy foods in small retail food stores. Valid and reliable measures are necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of these programs. The validated instruments currently available for assessments require in-person evaluations, with surveys taking up to 30 minutes per store to complete. This instrument was developed by researchers at Arizona State University to simplify the process of evaluating the effectiveness of healthy store interventions, and to enable community partners and practitioners to conduct their own evaluations of food access. The SCAT was validated against an adapted version of the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey for Corner Stores, and tested for feasibility of use over the telephone. The SCAT was found to discriminate between corner stores in the top 20% of healthfulness scores from those in the lower 80% with 89% accuracy.

In 2015 a panel of experts was convened by Healthy Eating Research, a program of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, to establish a set of minimum guidelines small retail food stores could reach to be classified as meeting basic or preferred stocking levels. Work is currently in progress to assess how the SCAT scores correlate with basic and preferred levels. 

ContributorsDeWeese, Robin (Creator) / Ohri-Vachaspati, Punam (Creator) / Todd, Michael (Creator) / Karpyn, Allison (Creator) / Yedidia, Michael J., 1946- (Creator) / Kennedy, Michelle (Creator) / Bruening, Meg (Creator) / Wharton, Christopher M. (Creator)
Created2015
156207-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
When cartographers and graphic designers create maps they choose typefaces. Often, serif and sans serif typefaces are paired together to represent different information on a map. Typefaces have a communicated tone and choosing the correct typeface combination to send the intended message can be challenging. The purpose of this study

When cartographers and graphic designers create maps they choose typefaces. Often, serif and sans serif typefaces are paired together to represent different information on a map. Typefaces have a communicated tone and choosing the correct typeface combination to send the intended message can be challenging. The purpose of this study was to create an analysis of the aesthetic characteristics of typeface pairings to assist map creators when choosing typefaces. An online survey was utilized to collect responses from graphic designers who have been trained in at least one year or more in design from a higher education institution. There were 30 participants in the study and they scored 24 typeface pairings, 12 differentiating and 12 superfamily, on 48 maps. Scoring was done on eight aesthetic characteristics: friendly, whimsical, cheap, neutral, bland, corporate, serious and modern. The researcher conducted an analysis of each typeface’s microaesthetics and then compared these to the survey’s scored aesthetic characteristics. It was concluded that there are many factors that go into comparing the typeface pairings of serif and sans serif typeface combinations. However, a selection of a superfamily typeface pairing is better than selecting a differentiating pairing. Future research should focus on conducting studies with a varying amount of typeface styles. Also, to include less maps per survey and a survey completion status bar.
ContributorsFinden, Nathan (Author) / Ralston, Laurie (Thesis advisor) / Carrasquilla, Christina (Committee member) / Westover, William (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018