Annotated Bibliography Sean Streier

I found this research to be particularly interesting: I found this research to be interesting for two reasons. The first being i had talked about this concept of taxing junk food in a previous class. Since i am a phyed and health ed major, in my nutrition class we got on the concept. From then on the thought of this kind of sat in my mind and was always making me think of the possibilities. The second reason was that i personally believe there is some way to fight obesity starting with diet and big brand junk food companies.

This part of my annotated bibliography was surprisingly difficult: The most difficult part of this project would defiantly be finding the reliable sources. When you just go around looking at source and randomly picking them, you don't think about it. However, once you start using tests to measure credibility it becomes harder.

Next time I would do this differently: Next time I were to do this kind of project maybe i would start finding sources a little sooner. That way maybe it would make finding really good credible sources easier.

Lindsey, Charles, and Debabrata Talukdar. "To Buy Or Not To Buy: Consumers' Demand Response Patterns For Healthy Versus Unhealthy Food." Journal of Marketing 77 (2013): 124-38. JSTOR. Web. 10 Feb. 2014.

This article which appears in the Journal of Marketing, ponders the fact of the economics of healthy and unhealthy food. At the very beginning of the article the authors go over an example of price elasticity between healthy and unhealthy food. By the end of their example they come to the conclusion that even if the number variables were the same for both foods, unhealthy foods will still have a higher demand. They also go over a few terms that people may not understand and relate them to the topic of food. These terms were, rational demand, impulsive demand. Through this article they also go over a study they conducted called the Supermarket scanner data. They took a random sample group and found the data of how many households were buying unhealthy items and healthy items. The results were actually surprising, some would think that unhealthy would be much higher. While the results show they were actually somewhat close. On average unhealthy only outweighed healthy by one hundred points or less. Overall this article provides the points and views of the economics of food and how it relates to unhealthy and healthy food.

When assessing this source I used the CRAAP test. After evaluating the authors i found them to be pretty credible, also with an added bonus of this article being in a very credible journal called the Journal of Marketing. As well as the authors being credible, the article its self is not even a year old yet. Which leads to the point of the information being pretty up to date. The information give in this article is also very prevalent to what I am going to be talking about in future papers. Also, the article uses facts based off of experiments run. It does not make up their own information that they believe to be true based off of opinion. All in all, I would consider this source to be very useful and would consider it to be reliable and appropriate for use on a paper

This source ended up being pretty helpful in my search for information. Not in a fact of it giving me political views, but rather on economic views of the issue. It can really add another aspect to my paper that may not normally be added with just political views. This information will also help me shape my opinion in the fact that I will have experimental evidence to help support my argument. While this source was very interesting and resourceful, it did not change my view on the subject whats so ever. If anything it just helped solidify the point in my head.

Gahvari, Firouz, and Harry Tsang. "Optimal Taxation and Junk Food." (2013): 4-6. Web. 10 Feb. 2014.

In the section of this paper I decided to use the author goes over the taxation of junk food. He first starts off talking about previous attempts at this in society. As he finishes that he moves on into a more in depth look at the affect this can have on society. He goes on to say that the taxation is popular but is it right for the government to impose a tax? As he goes on he goes over the theory that economics assumes all consumers are well informed. Which leads to him going into the economics of food, just as the previous source had.

Assessing this source was fairly easy, to start it came from professors from two universities one being the University of Illinois and the Second being the University of North Dakota. as well as those two facts it was also found on a website ending in "org". Which when taken into consideration can add a lot of credibility. An added benefit of this source is that it is less than a year old. It was released in November of 2013. Also, with the source being an academic writing, it makes it a lot more credible.

After reading the pages I thought would be most useful to my paper I determined that this source can be very useful. Though it also gives me an economic stand point in a way, it also gives me some history of the topic. I like how it states past states that have tried this or even thought about it. I can use this to my advantage in my paper in the fact that I can potentially look for sources talking about those states and how well it worked. Also, this source gave me a few different ideas compared to the other source that had economics. One example being, informational failures, which just implies that the market just assumes we have been well informed and until proven otherwise it will react in that way. Overall, I really liked this source, and as I read through all 27 pages of the paper, I may even find more information that can help.

Comans, Tracy A., et al. "The cost-effectiveness and consumer acceptability of taxation strategies to reduce rates of overweight and obesity among children in Australia: study protocol." BMC public health 13.1 (2013): 1182. 10 Feb. 2014.

This article is also a semi economic view to the topic of taxation of junk food to lower obesity. This article in particular looks at the effect of this on childhood obesity in Australia. One thing that stuck out in the article is the author brings up the point that taxing junk food will be much more complicated than alcohol or tobacco. Also the author goes over the fact that there is no real definition of what junk food is. We all have a perception of it, but is there really a definition that the government can use to determine what and what not to tax? All that is brought up in this article. As well through this paper it brings up a previous attempt to tax junk or snack food. It was removed when companies reported losses of almost a million dollars. As well as them saying the taxes were confusing regressive and arbitrary.

This source after evaluating can be considered credible. The article can be found on a web site called biomedcentral, which once looked into seemed to pretty reliable. There were also plenty of authors on this article, all of which after looking into are credible as well. One thing that popped out to me with this source, was the fact of the amount of authors. I found that very assuring, knowing you have many people looking over each others work. Also, the content is fairly recent, therefore we know that any data presented in the article is up to date and not years out dated.

I found this source very helpful in finding out information on my topic. Even though the title says Australia, it still brought up some American news in this subject. Also, it was nice to see what other counties think of this issue and the way of solving it. The last two sources were about economics in America, one of the most obese countries in the world. Therefore, hearing from a country like Australia can really add to my paper. It gives a whole new perceptive when looking into what may work here, and what other outside people think. I do feel I will use the source in that way, bringing it up to provide another view point of an American idea or source.

Escobar, Maria A. Cabrera, et al. "Evidence that a tax on sugar sweetened beverages reduces the obesity rate: a meta-analysis." BMC public health 13.1 (2013): 1072. 10 Feb. 2014.

This article seems to go over in general what the other sources go over but just a little modified. It seems to go more in depth on the affect of a taxation of sugary sodas in general. Overall, the article suggests that a tax on these products would work. It brings in the factor that as price rises people will be less likely to buy the product. Which in result would lead to people drinking more milk, or even fruit juices. It also talks about in the article that if this were to happen it would almost for sure lower the weight of Americans, because studies have shown a decrease in sugary beverages can and will decrease weight of an individual. This article also brought up something not previously stated, that a tax on these sugary substances would generate millions of dollars potentially for the United States.

After accessing the article for credibility I have found that is reliable and credible. Like a previous source it was found on biomedcentral's website. Just as previously stated above this was found to be a credible website. unlike the above source this one does not have quite as many authors. However, after looking into them I found those authors are credible. Something else that I found that makes this credible is the date. It was published in November of 2013, so it is not even a year old. Which is very helpful because you know the information is very up to date.

Overall, I found this source to be very helpful in finding information for my paper. I like the fact that it talks specifically about sugary drinks such as pop. I feel I can really use that as a good example of products in my paper that should be taxed. Therefore, with this source I can go on to talk about what they say the result of the tax would be. I also liked how they were up front and just said that a tax would work. They didn't beat around the bush with fancy terminology to make themselves look better. All in all, I think with the source I have gained a solid foundation of information on taxing sugary substances in America.

Dragone, Davide, Francesco Manaresi, and Luca Savorelli. "Obesity and smoking: can we catch two birds with one tax?." (2013): 11-19. Web. 11 Feb. 2014.

The art of this paper that I am using studies the effect that prices have on an individuals behavior to eating. Like other sources I used this goes into some economics of the price of food. It begins to talk about the law of demand, which in the short run means, as demand increases price will drop and the opposite for demand falling. Overall this article is getting at the point that as the price of the junk food increases the demand for it would go down. Which in turn a tax on junk food could very well lead to a decrease in weight in society. That is as the article states if the law of demand holds true.

After looking into the source I have found that the source is credible. The authors are foreign but come from a pretty credible institution. As well as that the article is not quite a year old either. Which in turn means the info I received is up to date and not years old. Also This was comprised of three total authors. which may not mean a lot but I like to think that it means that there are just that many more eyes looking the paper over. Overall, I really think this source is credible and will work.

After reading this article I determined that it can be useful in helping me write my paper. It provides information that is a little different and more in depth with terms than previous sources. I feel that I will benefit in my paper by using the law of demand theory that this paper brought up. I personally believe that this idea along with other sources complement each other.

Mosier, Samantha L. "COOKIES, CANDY, AND COKE: EXAMINING STATE SUGAR-SWEETENED-BEVERAGE TAX POLICY FROM A MULTIPLE STREAMS APPROACH." International Review of Public Administration 18.1 (2013): 93-120. Web. 11 Feb. 2014

At the beginning of the article it tells us the purpose and it says, the goal is to shed some light on the necessary conditions for a state legislature to pass a tax legislation on sugar-sweetened-beverages (SSB). As the article goes on it begins to talk about a few studies that support their ideas of what it will take. As well they discuss the attempts by Colorado and Kansas trying to pass such legislation. Lastly, the article talks about what a tax of this level could do not only for the governments revenue, but also the public's health.

Through evaluating this source I have found it to be credible. The author comes from a pretty credible university called, Colorado State University. As well this article was posted in the year 2013 which means that at the most the info is only a year old. Which is very useful because we then know it is fairly up to date. With that the article was also posted in the International Review of Public Administration. Which also gives this source very good credibility.

Overall this source is going to prove to be very helpful in my writing of the research paper. It gives me the perspective of two other states that have tried a tax on junk food. I am thinking that i can use this in my paper when talking about prior success or failures that can be fixed. Also it gives me what they believe to be necessary to make a tax happen and be successful. Which I can use in the same idea as the last.

Waterlander, Wilma E., et al. "Effects of different discount levels on healthy products coupled with a healthy choice label, special offer label or both: results from a web-based supermarket experiment." International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 10.1 (2013): 59. Web. 11 Feb. 2014.

This article explores the idea of discounts and what effect they have on your choice of healthy or unhealthy food. Through the course of the article they go over a few experiments that were done to determine their ending conclusion. At the end of the article they finally discussed their findings. They brought up the point that people did tend to buy more healthy foods when there was a discount. However, people did not cut down on their amount of junk food items purchased. Which in the end they talk about how that since there is evidence that people buy more healthy items when discounted that maybe something can be done to make it happen more often.

After analyzing this source I Found it to be credible. It comes from the same site that I have previously used for other sources which is biomedcentral. Also this comes from a pretty reliable journal as well which is the International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. With those two components I also found the authors of the paper to be credible. Once again there were more than one which in my opinion benefits the paper as well. Lastly, this article was published in May of 2013. This means that the information is not even a year old yet. Which in turn means that we can consider this source and the info portrayed to be reliable.

Personally this source will help in my writing of my research paper. I can use it in many aspects. One way being is i can use the study of people buying more healthy food when discounted as a lead up to why junk food should be taxed. With that I can also use the point that was made, that people still bought the same amount of junk food. Overall, I found this source to be very informational and helpful in writing my paper.

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License