Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
T\'?
IIo"' could the girls pursue S\vim1ning, bicycl ing, soccer, skatin g, and scooter riding i f the neighborhood
did not have sa fe parks ''here such activities could be enjoyed? Tl1e interventi ons suggested requ ire more
suppor ting evidence that the girls \vou ld try them.
The themes of "barriers to physical activity," "sedentary behaviors," and "directions for intervention"
did not yiel d a consistent, mea n ingft1l picru re. Rather, resul ts fro1n one then1e seem to under 1ninc the
result!> of another theme-probably because space li n1itations proh ibited the inclusion of detail ed quota-
tions tha t would have addressed the inconsistencies. Alternatively, the authors could have inclu ded a
detailed i nterpreta tion of \vhy a ll of these resu lts could simu ltaneously be true.
2. Mrlidation of fin dings: No indication is provided that the au thors valida ted their findings \vith the
girls or their caretakers or 'vi th experts in the area of .t\f rican Am erica n child obesity.
3. M ultiple reset1rcher participation: 'fhe acknov1ledgments section describes t\\'O authors as parti ci-
pating in the data ana lysis. ln the "Da ta Analysis" section, the authors state tha t "individ ual resea rchers
rea d all interviews and the team evaluated ma in codes and text samples" (C;ordon-Larsen et al., 2004,
p. 482). Half of the intervie,vs \Vere double-coded by t\vo coders, as indi cated by the staten1ent "Cases
of disagreement \Vere discll!>sed to generate consensus on coding" (p. 482).These descri ptions of who par-
ticipa ted in data ana lysis might have 1nore detail.