Assessing the impact of the public nutrition information environment: Adapting the cancer information overload scale to measure diet information overload

Abstract

Objective: A growing body of research suggests that exposure to too much information - particularly contradictory information that characterizes much health-related information - can lead to feeling overwhelmed. This construct has been conflated with fatalistic beliefs that are negatively associated with preventive behaviors. The objective of this study was to adapt the 8-item Cancer Information Overload (CIO) scale to assess overload of healthy diet information.

Methods: Confirmatory factor analyses with a community sample of rural California adults (n = 290; 75% female; 58% Latino; 46% ≤ H.S./G.E.D.).

Results: Items assessing Diet Information Overload loaded significantly on their relevant factor; factor loadings were acceptable (β >.40). The adapted original scale (CFI = 1.000, RSMEA = .000, SMSR = .022) and a shorter 5-item scale (CFI = .984, RMSEA = .051, SMSR = .026) fit well.

Conclusion: The Cancer Information Overload scale was successfully adapted and shortened to measure perceptions - previously mischaracterized as fatalistic - pertaining to diet information. Improved measures distinguishing between fatalistic beliefs and outcomes of the information environment are critical.

Practice implications: Understanding information overload is important for shaping prevention messages distinct from those needed to address fatalistic beliefs. Nutrition education efforts should consider the broader - cluttered - information environment in which nutrition education and communication occurs, and public health messages may drown.

Keywords: Beliefs; CFA; DIO scale; Diet; Information overload; Measurement; Nutrition.