Evaluate one or more prevention strategies for obesity.

Refer to the paper 2 assessment criteria when awarding marks.

The command term “evaluate” requires candidates to make an appraisal of the chosen prevention strategies by weighing up the strengths and limitations of each. Although a discussion of both strengths and limitations is required, it does not have to be evenly balanced to gain high marks.

It is appropriate for candidates to address programmes, models, studies and theories related to prevention strategies for obesity in their evaluation. If a candidate refers to a treatment as a strategy to prevent relapse this is acceptable so long as the focus of the response is on prevention.

Prevention strategies aim to change an individual’s lifestyle by targeting healthier eating, more exercise or both. Prevention strategies could include, but are not limited to:
• government intervention programmes, such as requiring labelling of all food products or imposing zoning laws for better access to healthy food markets (Ashe et al., 2003)
• campaigns promoting healthy eating (Golan et al., 1998)
• exercise awareness campaigns (Huhman et al., 2005)
• national health campaigns, such as the British Nutrition Foundation’s eatwell plate which emphasizes healthy eating (2007).

Evaluation of the selected strategies may include but is not limited to:
• methodological considerations
• cultural and gender considerations
• empirical and/or contrary findings or explanations
• the effectiveness of prevention strategies (and the difficulty in determining the effectiveness)
• multifaceted approaches to obesity.

If a candidate provides general knowledge of how dieting and exercise help in overcoming obesity with no link to prevention strategies or reference to psychological research, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [3] for criterion A, knowledge and comprehension, up to a maximum of [3] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of [2] for criterion C, organization.

If a candidate discusses only strengths or only limitations, the response should be awarded up to a maximum of [5] for criterion B, critical thinking, and up to a maximum of [2] for criterion C, organization. Up to full marks may be awarded for criterion A, knowledge and comprehension.

Candidates may evaluate one prevention strategy for obesity in order to demonstrate depth of knowledge, or may evaluate a larger number of prevention strategies for obesity in order to demonstrate breadth of knowledge. Both approaches are equally acceptable.