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.
The complexity and nuance of how social networks shape dietary behaviors and health dynamics remain underexplored, particularly in collectivist societies where family and peer relationships strongly impact health. This study applies Social Network Analysis (SNA) to examine these dynamics in Singapore.
Design:
An online household survey of young adults (age 21-35) and family (21+) assessed the consumption of healthy food groups (fruit, vegetable intake), unhealthy food groups (fast food, snack consumption), and social network characteristics (interaction frequency, emotional closeness, shared meals, perceived health influence). Data were analyzed using network analysis, mixed regression models, and generalized estimating equations.
Setting:
Online Singaporean household survey.
Results:
Among 116 participants from 36 households, 345 unique individuals and 1,145 dyadic relationships were identified, with networks averaging 9.7 nodes (SD:4.7) and 33.2 edges (SD:27.3). Mutual health influence was strongest in spousal (β=0.89, 95%CI:0.42–1.35) and intergenerational ties (older-to-younger: β=0.62, 95%CI:0.29–0.94; younger-to-older: β=0.36, 95%CI:0.03–0.68), and associated with emotional closeness (β=0.38, 95%CI:0.30–0.46) and shared meals (β=0.43, 95%CI:0.36–0.49). Greater family health effort correlated with lower snack (AOR:0.50, 95%CI:0.29–0.85) and fast-food consumption (AOR:0.41, 95%CI:0.22–0.77), while higher perceived family health associated with increased snack intake (AOR:3.21, 95%CI:1.58–6.52). Frequent meals with friends associated with lower fast-food intake (AOR:0.50, 95%CI:0.30–0.84), but no associations with fruit or vegetable intake were found.
Conclusion:
Findings highlight intergenerational and spousal ties as key health influencers, particularly through shared meals, and the complex role of social networks in shaping diet. Analyses suggest network-based interventions may be more effective in reducing unhealthy rather than promoting healthy eating behaviors.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.