- Email: [email protected]
Forget Translations — Rewrite in the Requested Language
From SNEB Forget Translations — Rewrite in the Requested Language After working with many minority communities in California, I am very prejudiced against translating nutrition education materials designed for the mainstream population into the languages of minority populations. It can be insulting when there is no attempt to insure the content is culturally appropriate and relevant. For example, the staple foods featured should be the staple foods of the target population. They should be shown in the form in which these foods are purchased and eaten. The GEM by Baumhofer et al1 is a good example of developing food models appropriate to the culture. The cooking equipment should be readily available in most households, as should the spices and herbs featured in recipes. Any pictures or drawings of families should look like the audi-
ence, and the settings should look familiar rather than intimidating. Most importantly, don’t expect minority populations to figure out how the information in the pamphlet relates to what they do. It is up to the writer to show how it relates and then explain it to the readers. It is critically important to understand customs and traditions involving food. You may have never placed food on an altar honoring ancestors, but this may be a practice of some families. You would not want to refer to ‘‘wasting food’’ in this context. Instead of asking a bilingual person to translate word for word, ask the person to rewrite the pamphlet by focusing on the advice you are attempting to share with the target population. Then have another translator back-translate the text into English to
see if it communicates the advice correctly. If it doesn’t, explain the problems and have it rewritten again in the native language. To see pamphlets on the same nutrition topic written in different Asian languages, go to http://cwh.berkeley.edu/search/ node/Asian%20language. Joanne P. Ikeda, MA, RD 2013–2014 President, Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior
REFERENCE 1. Baumhofer NK, Rothfus N, Yoshimura S, Quensell ML, Look MA. Developing a multicultural nutrition education tool: Pacific island food models [published online ahead of print March 15, 2014]. J Nutr Educ Behav. doi:10.1016/j.jneb. 2014.02.006.
From JNEB Better Research, Better Writing, Better Publishing A tremendous amount of work is needed to write the proposal to get the grant to do the research. Still more effort is needed to conduct the research, collect the data, and analyze the results, and then to write the paper, respond to reviewers and editors, and read the proof after it is accepted. So, in reading the article by Reicks et al1 and the conclusion for us to do a better job in terms of studies evaluating cooking behavior, I wonder, is it the funding that kept us from including a control group? Was it recruitment issues that kept us from randomizing? Were we limited in time and so didn't validate the surveys? Or was the pilot-testing not included because of page and word limitations of the journal? Certainly we publish instrument development, as can be seen in this
issue in the article by Rahimi et al.2 But in an effort to devote more pages and words to the clarity needed to demonstrate excellence in research, JNEB has also begun publishing Methods papers. These papers are primarily for interventions that are multi-year and have already received peer review during the grant proposal process. It takes all of us to move our research and practice forward! Please consider your current work and think about your methodology and research protocols in terms of a future Methods paper. We also are highlighting some of the work done in the physical activity area as a collection of papers on www. jneb.org. We would like to see more of these as well, so when your intervention has nutrition and physical activity, send both of those papers to us!
Karen Chapman-Novakofski, PhD, RD, LDN Editor-in-Chief
REFERENCES 1. Reicks M, Trofholz AC, Stang JS, Laska MN. Impact of cooking and home food preparation interventions among adults: outcomes and implications for future programs. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2014;46:259-276. 2. Rahimi T, Dehdari T, Aryaeian N, Gohari MR, Esfeh JM. Developing and testing a measurement tool for assessing predictors of breakfast consumption based on a health promotion model. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2014;46: 250-258.
ence, and the settings should look familiar rather than intimidating. Most importantly, don’t expect minority populations to figure out how the information in the pamphlet relates to what they do. It is up to the writer to show how it relates and then explain it to the readers. It is critically important to understand customs and traditions involving food. You may have never placed food on an altar honoring ancestors, but this may be a practice of some families. You would not want to refer to ‘‘wasting food’’ in this context. Instead of asking a bilingual person to translate word for word, ask the person to rewrite the pamphlet by focusing on the advice you are attempting to share with the target population. Then have another translator back-translate the text into English to
see if it communicates the advice correctly. If it doesn’t, explain the problems and have it rewritten again in the native language. To see pamphlets on the same nutrition topic written in different Asian languages, go to http://cwh.berkeley.edu/search/ node/Asian%20language. Joanne P. Ikeda, MA, RD 2013–2014 President, Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior
REFERENCE 1. Baumhofer NK, Rothfus N, Yoshimura S, Quensell ML, Look MA. Developing a multicultural nutrition education tool: Pacific island food models [published online ahead of print March 15, 2014]. J Nutr Educ Behav. doi:10.1016/j.jneb. 2014.02.006.
From JNEB Better Research, Better Writing, Better Publishing A tremendous amount of work is needed to write the proposal to get the grant to do the research. Still more effort is needed to conduct the research, collect the data, and analyze the results, and then to write the paper, respond to reviewers and editors, and read the proof after it is accepted. So, in reading the article by Reicks et al1 and the conclusion for us to do a better job in terms of studies evaluating cooking behavior, I wonder, is it the funding that kept us from including a control group? Was it recruitment issues that kept us from randomizing? Were we limited in time and so didn't validate the surveys? Or was the pilot-testing not included because of page and word limitations of the journal? Certainly we publish instrument development, as can be seen in this
issue in the article by Rahimi et al.2 But in an effort to devote more pages and words to the clarity needed to demonstrate excellence in research, JNEB has also begun publishing Methods papers. These papers are primarily for interventions that are multi-year and have already received peer review during the grant proposal process. It takes all of us to move our research and practice forward! Please consider your current work and think about your methodology and research protocols in terms of a future Methods paper. We also are highlighting some of the work done in the physical activity area as a collection of papers on www. jneb.org. We would like to see more of these as well, so when your intervention has nutrition and physical activity, send both of those papers to us!
Karen Chapman-Novakofski, PhD, RD, LDN Editor-in-Chief
REFERENCES 1. Reicks M, Trofholz AC, Stang JS, Laska MN. Impact of cooking and home food preparation interventions among adults: outcomes and implications for future programs. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2014;46:259-276. 2. Rahimi T, Dehdari T, Aryaeian N, Gohari MR, Esfeh JM. Developing and testing a measurement tool for assessing predictors of breakfast consumption based on a health promotion model. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2014;46: 250-258.