We live in a world full of nutritional advice. Some of it is well-grounded and strongly evidence based, but much of it is compromised, biased, ideological, and potentially even harmful. One of the things I want all of you to leave this course with is a more well developed “Spidey sense”/ability to spot these faulty claims and be equipped to review, critique and interpret them. So we’re going to practice this a few times! At three points in the semester, you are going to: 1) find a nutritional claim online (blog, YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, etc), link and summarize it, and then 2) Apply a skeptical eye and research the claims. The final report will be short, about 2 pages. The majority of the work here will be behind the scenes, where you challenge the methodology of studies/claims and see if they hold up under scrutiny. So there’s not too much writing for these, but there should be a fair amount of research and thought.
Assignment Guidelines:
Select a Claim:
Choose a nutritional claim that has been recently popularized in the media. For example, some popular ones right now are: keto, paleo, intermittent fasting, carnivore diet, Mediterranean, etc. There are many, many more.
Ensure the claim is specific enough to allow for a detailed analysis but broad enough to find underlying research that supports it.
Make sure to link the source of this claim in the report.
Research the Claim:
Identify the original source(s) of the claim, which may involve locating primary research articles.
If the video/claim says “studies have shown”…ask yourself – which studies? Do they document their sources? What do the actual sources/studies say?
Retrieve and read the entire study or studies that the claim is based upon, not just the abstract or summary.
Critique the Methodology (these questions aren’t an exhaustive list – use these as a guide to get started):
Evaluate the research design: Was it an observational study, randomized controlled trial, meta-analysis, etc.?
Were diets self-reported? Controlled by the researchers?
How long was the study?
Analyze the sample size and population: Were they adequate and appropriate to support the conclusions? (This step is very important)
Consider the variables and controls: How were confounding variables addressed?
Who funded the research? Do you think there was any potential source of bias here?
Assess the Findings:
Discuss whether the conclusions drawn in the study are justified by the results.
Examine whether the media’s representation (where you found the initial claim) of the research accurately reflects the findings.
Are there other studies that have claims that run counter to the one(s) you found?
Conclude with a Critical Summary:
Summarize the validity of the research methodologies used.
Discuss how the claim holds up under scrutiny and whether it should be moderated or reevaluated considering your analysis.
References:
Cite all sources referenced in your analysis using APA format.
Include at least one primary research article and the media source presenting the claim.
(If you are aiming for an A-level grade, make sure to cite multiple studies)
Formatting Requirements:
Use 12-point, and 1-inch margins on all sides.
Maximum length is 2 pages (double-spaced); this does not include the reference page.
Include a header with your name, course number, and the date.
Tips for Success:
Avoid using overly technical language; your critique should be understandable by a general audience.
I want to see evidence of you “going down the rabbit hole” and really digging into these claims.
Remain objective in your analysis; criticize the methodology, not the researchers or institutions.
Be thorough yet concise due to the page limit; prioritize the most critical points in your argument.
The claims you find don’t have to be “wrong” to be investigated. For example, some nutritional advice in podcasts could be quite well supported. In either case, whether the claims are well-grounded or not, you need to demonstrate why they are reliable or not through the research.
How will you be evaluated?
Grading Rubric: Your assignment will be graded based on the following criteria:
The following breakdown is a general/rough guide to how I will weight different aspects of these assignments
Clarity and organization of the critique (30%)
Depth of analysis into the research methodology (40%)
Accuracy in summarizing the scientific study and media portrayal (20%)
Quality of writing, including grammar, punctuation, and adherence to formatting (10%)
Ultimately, I will be looking at how far “down the rabbit hole” you go. This will largely distinguish the B from A-level work. A B-level report will have some solid research, some good critiques of the claims, but present a limited set of papers and studies. A-level work should have a lot of citations and a level of analysis that shows a deep exploration of the claims from multiple angles. C-level work is marked by more surface level engagement. The steps of this guide may have been followed, but only at the base minimum of effort. Any grades below something in the C range have serious issues, or didn’t engage with core components of this guide.
