GIÁO ÁN DẠY THÊM (KẾ HOẠCH BÀI DẠY BUỔI 2) - TIẾNG ANH 6, 7 GLOBAL SUCCESS (2...
Sociology of food: "What did you have for dinner?“ Empirical Questions and Procedures
1. EATING: COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVES
A Colloquium at the Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies
Helsinki, May 23-25, 2012
“What’ did you have for dinner?“
Empirical Questions
and Procedures
Prof. Jean-Pierre Poulain
sociologue et anthropologue
Chair of Food Studies:
Foods, Cultures and Health
Taylor’s-Toulouse University Center
2. • "Despite all the progress made in human
nutrition, it is important to recognize that the
measurement of what is truly eaten by
individuals remains the most difficult to
realize in this discipline."
Jean-François Desjeux, 1996
3. One central question of sociology
• How to be sure that
what is being said to
you, is not a discourse
build for a sociologist?
4. The “destructuration” of french meal
and the Plasticity of Empirical data
• 1979, Claude Fischler « Gastro-anomie »
• Nicolas Herpin & Martine Chaudron, 1988
• 1993, Claude Grignon « L’alimentation des étudiants »
• 1997, Credoc « Le repas à la française résiste » and the results
could be interpret in the other sense. Credoc Newsletter Le Monde
• Jean Pierre Poulain, 1995, 1998, 2002, 2008, 2010
Simplification continuously since 1995
5. Claude Fischler
• « Le repas composé et commensal est pratiquement en voie de disparition aux Etats-Unis. Dans les familles de
couche moyenne citadines, il arrive que l’on ne se trouve réunis autour de la table du dîner familial que deux ou
trois fois par semaine et le repas ne dure guère alors plus de vingt minutes. Les mêmes travaux montrent que la
moyenne du nombre de prises alimentaires (food contact) dans la journée est d’une vingtaine et que, dés lors, le
rythme supposé des trois repas quotidiens n’est plus qu’une survivance. Des phénomènes, peut être du même
ordre quoique d’une échelle moindre, sont d’ores et déjà observables en Europe...» (1979).
• "The organize and commensal meal is virtually disappearing in the
United States. In the urban middle class families, sometimes we
do is gathered around the family dinner table for two or three
times a week and the meal did not last longer than twenty
minutes. The same studies show that the average number of
eating (food contact) during the day is about twenty and that,
henceforth, the assumed rate of three meals a day is more than
survival. Phenomena, may be similar, although a smaller scale, are
already being seen in Europe ... "(1979).
6. French student’s Food Habits
(Grignon 1993, 312)
• N = 4530 sample, N = return 1788
• Auto reporting data during a week meals
and extra-prandial food intakes
• Results :
– There is no evidence of multiplication of intermediate
pauses ("pot", "coffee break", appetizer, etc..) even in the
days when a meal is missing“ « On ne constate pas de multiplication des pauses
intermédiaires (« pot », « pause-café », apéritif, etc.) même dans les journées où il manque un repas »).
– “To eat normally, it is also not eating, or eat as little as
possible between the meals” « Manger normalement c’est aussi ne pas manger, ou manger le
moins possible « en dehors des repas ».
7. Beyond commun sens
• « En effet les étudiants, qui sont à la fois des jeunes en rupture (non établis, non
« posés », réputés portés à la transgression et à la contestation, etc.) et des
précurseurs sérieux (dans la mesure où ils ont de bonnes chances d’appartenir par
la suite aux classes dominantes), représentent le cas le plus favorable pour
observer les usages relatifs aux rythmes des pauses alimentaires, et l’émergence
éventuelle d’un nouveau modèle ».
• “Students, who are both young out (not established,
not" posed "deemed likely to transgression and contestation,
etc..) and precursors serious (to the extent that they have
good likely to belong to the later ruling classes), represent
the most favorable case to observe the customs
relating to the rhythms of food breaks, and the
possible emergence of a new model“.
8.
9. “What did you eat
yesterday at lunch?”
• What happen, when the person
interviewed have not done what he
use to do ?
• 2 solutions:
– The first one is to answer what he used to do….
– The second one what he really did.
• The consequence is a normalization in the
statistical sense of results
10. Between qualitative and quantitative
taking in account implicit meaning
• The questionnaire first ask:
What is for your a proper breakfast, (lunch, diner)?,
(Proper meal of Mary Douglas)
• Then, helps one to reconstruct the previous day, making
it clear that what interests us is what really happened the day before
• Each intake is described in terms of composition of place, social
context, temporality ...
11. What are the dimensions
of the problem?
• At the questionnaire level • At the data collection
– What is the status of the level
collected variables? – The dilemma between
– How to help the coast and quality
interviewed to rebuild the – From observation to self
food events reporting
– The relation between – The illusion of declaration
norms and practices versus practices
– Food days
– Budget time
13. Data Collection
Declared Opinion Values
Practices
Direct- Indirect-
Reconstructed Norms Symbols
observed observed Conscience
Practices
Practices Practices Attitudes
Observed Declared Data
Data
Practices Representations
Practices Representations
14. Implantation horaire des prises 2006
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0-1H
2-3H
4-5H
6-7H
8-9H
10 - 11 H
12 - 13 H
14 - 15 H
16 - 17 H
18 - 19 H
20 - 21 H
22 - 23 H
% Petit déjeuner % Déjeuner % Diner % Hors Repas
15. The breakdown of set mealtimes
% eating or drinking, in or out of home, by time of day, all days, 7.00am to Midnight
Nb: Datapoints relate to 30 mins following time given, e.g. 7.00 am = 7.00 am to 7.30 am
30 % 1961 2001
25
20
15
10
5
0
6.00 am
7.00 am
8.00 am
9.00 am
10.00 am
11.00 am
Noon
1.00 pm
2.00 pm
3.00 pm
4.00 pm
5.00 pm
6.00 pm
7.00 pm
8.00 pm
9.00 pm
10.00 pm
11.00 pm
Midnight
Source: BBC/ONS/nVision
Base: 545/654 adults in households with children, UK
16. How to collecte data?
• Observation
• Face to face
• Cati system
• Self-reporting by internet
• Self-reporting paper
19. Comparison between norms, reconstruct
practices and observed practices (Poulain et al. 1995)
What was Reconstruct practices Practices
your lunch 19
yesterday ?
20. Breakfast: normes
27%
Le modèle
PDJ anglo-saxon dominant PDJ
continental 52%
8%
Autres formules
PDJ continental
Montée du PDJ
anglo-saxon » 27%
PDJ simplifié
Apparition d’une
13% 52% formule de petit
déjeuner simplifiée
(laitage) :13%
21. Petit déjeuner : les pratiques
Le PDJ continental est +
fort dans les pratiques que
dans les normes 57%
7%
contre 52%
PDJ anglo-saxon
57%
11%
Autres formules PDJ continental Le modèle simplifié + fort
dans les pratiques que
PDJ simplifié dans les normes 25%
contre 13%
Le PDJ anglo-saxon est +
25% faible dans les pratiques
que dans les normes 7%
contre 27%
24. Lunch : the norms
Repas complets 61%
36%
Attachment to
the full lunch
Entrée+PG+F+Dessert Entrée+PG+Dessert
25%
norm 61%
Autres
Plat unique
Entrée+PG
(Grosse) entrée+Dessert
2%
PG+Dessert
7%
3% 8%
18%
Repas simplifiées 38%
24
Source : Poulain et al., 2001.
25. Lunch : the practices
Repas complets 37%
16%
Strong lunch
5% Entrée+PG+Fromage+Dessert
simplifications (63%)
5% Autre
21%
Full lunch is weaker in
Sandwich
2% Entrée+PG+Dessert
Entrée+Dessert the practices (37%)
Plat Unique
Entrée+PG
12%
PG+Dessert
Emerging pattern
« Main dish (PG)+
5% dessert » (33%)
Repas simplifiés 63% 33%
25
Source : Poulain et al.,2001.
26.
27. 70,0
60,0
40,0
50,0
30,0
20,0
0,0
10,0
1 à2H
2 à3H
3 à4H
4 à5H
5 à6H
Source : Poulain et al.,2001.
6 à7H
7 à8H
8 à9H
9 à 10 H
10 à 11 H
11 à 12 H
12 à 13 H
13 à 14 H
14 à 15 H
15 à 16 H
16 à 17 H
17 à 18 H
18 à 19 H
19 à 20 H
20 à 21 H
21 à 22 H
22 à 23 H
Food intakes time table
23 à 24 H
0 à1H
Rrepas
Hors repas
27
31. Comparison between face to face
and cati
80
70
60
50 Norme
INPES
40 Prat
%
Linéaire (Norme )
Linéaire (INPES)
30
Linéaire (Prat )
20
10
0
1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
Jean-Pierre Poulain
32. Direction de la santé en Polynésie française
Université de Toulouse II
33. Direction de la santé en Polynésie française
Université de Toulouse II
34. Social Position (level of education and
income) and linked variables
Niveau scolaire+
Urbains Poids normal
16/25 ans Maigreur
-1/2 maohi 9.4% Popaa
Aucun ascendant maohi Demi
IMC moyen = 24.69
Niveau de revenu +
IMC moyen = 29.10
100% Maohi
50.6%
Moins de 35 ans
IMC moyen = 29.92
61 ans et + +1/2 maohi
Obésité Ruraux
100% Maohi
22.3%
17.6% Se définisse Maohi Surpoids
51/60 ans
IMC moyen = 31.6
Niveau scolaire -
Direction de la santé en Polynésie française
Université de Toulouse II
35. BMI and social position (level of education and
income)
Capital scolaire et économique et IMC
60,0 56,6
51,8
50,0
38,6 39,3
40,0 33,3
30,9
27,9 26,9 25,9
30,0 23,9
17,6
20,0 14,1
8,2
10,0 2,6
1,9 0,5
0,0
Scolaire et eco faible Scolaire et eco Scolaire faible et eco Scolaire fort
moyen fort
Maigreur Poids normal Surpoids Obésité
Direction de la santé en Polynésie française
Université de Toulouse II
36. The populations
IMC moyen et sentiment identitaire
35 29,8
27,42
30 24,45 23,3
25
20
15
10
5
0
Maohi Demi Popaa Tinito
Direction de la santé en Polynésie française
Université de Toulouse II
37. Number of meals
and corpulence (BMI)
60 %H 48 45
Maigreur
40 35 38 31 34 33
24 28 24 26 26 Poids normal
20 Surpoids
4 1 3 1 Obésité
0
2p sem/2p dim 2p sem/3p dim 3p sem/2p dim 3p sem/3p dim
Jean Pierre Poulain, université de Toulouse 37
38. Conclusion
• The study of the food models must be committed on the scientific mode,
with the manner of the ethno-sciences studying the pharmacopeia or the
medical practices of traditional ethnicities. It is the point of view of the
ecological anthropology which seeks to put at the day the interest certain
empirical choices. The relations between nutritional sciences and socio-
anthropology of the food can consider under new point of view.
Knowledge of nutritional sciences must be put at the service of the
improvement of a food model to seek the conditions of reduction health
risks, in the respect of there gustatory, symbolic and cultural dimensions .
• Jean-Pierre Poulain, « Combien de repas par jour ? Normes culturelles et normes médicales en Polynésie
Française », Journal des Anthropologues, 2006, n° 106-107, p. 245-268.
Jean Pierre Poulain, université de Toulouse 38
39. Some References
J.-P. Poulain, Sociologie de l’obésité, PUF, 2009.
J.-P. Poulain, Sociologies de l’alimentation, PUF, 2005.
J.-P. Poulain et E. Neirinck, Histoire de la cuisine et des cuisiniers,
Lanore, 2004.
J.-P. Corbeau et J.-P. Poulain, Penser l’alimentation, entre imaginaire et
rationalité, Privat, 2002.
J.-P. Poulain, Manger aujourd’hui, Attitudes, normes et pratiques,
Privat, 2001.
J.-P. Poulain, « Eléments de sociologie de l’alimentation et de la
nutrition », in A. Basdevant, M. Laville et E. Lerebours, Traité de
nutrition clinique, Flammarion, 2001.
« French gastronomie, french gastronomies », in Goldstein D. et
Merkele K., 2005, Culinary cultures of Europe Identity, Diversity and
dialogue, Éditions du Conseil de l’Europe, p. 157-170.
Site Internet : lemangeur-ocha.com
40. • Most of the informations of this PPT come from Dictionnaire des cultures alimentaires, PUF, oct. 2012
Some Publications in English
Book's chapter
• "The sociology of gastronomic decolonisation", in Shanta Nair-Venugopal, 2011, The Gaze of the West:
Framings of the East, Palgrave Macmillan
• “The social and a cultural aspects of the issues at stake in modern farming”, in Gleize J.-F., 2010,
Tomorrow’s World Needs The Farmers, Editions de L’Aube, p. 191-230.
• “French gastronomy, French gastronomies”, in Culinary Heritage and Diversity in Europe, published by The
European Council, 2005.
Articles
• Pigeyre M., Duhamel A., Poulain J.-P., Rousseaux J., Barbe P., Jeanneau S., Tibère L., Romon M., 2011,
"Influence of social factors on weight-related behaviours according to gender in the French adult
population", Appetite, Volume 58, Issue 2, April 2012, Pages 703–709
• Fournier T, Bruckert E, Czernichow S, Paulmyer A, Poulain JP, "The THEMA Study: a socio-demographic
survey of hyper-cholesterolaemic individuals", with, Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, 2011, 24-6,
572-582.
• "Gastronomic Heritages and Their Tourist Valorisations", in West meets east: a recipe of success in this era
of globalisation, Revue Tourisme, October 2008, pp. 1-18
• « The contemporary diet in France: « de-structuration » or from commensalism to « vagabond feeding »,
Appetite, 2002, 39, 43-55.
Notes de l'éditeur
3.2 The future of breakfast Turning now to eating habits, we look first at the ‘time-geography’ (the when and where) of eating. The first question to answer then is when do people eat? An example from the UK, the chart shows that the proportion of people eating at certain fixed times of the day has flattened out over the last two decades and that more people eat at different times during the day. In general, family life appears to have been much more structured in 1961 than it is now, and mealtimes provided the clearest indication of this. The chart here shows that not only have the sharp peaks in the proportion eating at certain times flattened out the troughs observed in 1961 have risen, as more people eat at other times of day. We know from other sources that our data here reflects a move away from regular eating patterns (more snacking) as well as possibly reflecting a tendency for today’s families to eat regular meals at a wider range of times than previously. Breakfast constitutes a really interesting example. According to Future Foundation research conducted in the UK (home of traditionally the fullest version in Europe), the breakfast ‘window’ is ‘stretching’ with the idea of a typical breakfast time of 7.30 to 8.30 disappearing. People are having breakfast at a wider range of times in the morning. This largely depends on the demands of families and employers with, for example, adults with children showing more flexible morning routines. Approximately 20% of people completely forego breakfast and the idea of a happy family breakfast – where all family members sit down together – may have disappeared for now: the majority of kids (six out of ten) either do not have breakfast or do not eat with their parents. However, contrary to popular opinion, the vast majority of people when they do eat breakfast do so at home. Two-thirds of under 35s, meanwhile, wish they had more time for breakfast each day. With these trends in mind, we believe breakfast could be in for something of a revival as people increasingly understand the social and health-related importance of it. People may begin to see breakfast as a ‘day-organiser’. We also see breakfast becoming more cosmopolitan and experimental with the variation in time, place, company and content continuing to grow.