How big is a food portion? A pilot study in Australian familiesClare E. Collins A B C , Tamara Bucher A B , Aimee Taylor A , Kristine Pezdirc A , Hannah Lucas A , Jane Watson A , Megan Rollo A , Kerith Duncanson A , Melinda J. Hutchesson A and Tracy Burrows A
A Nutrition and Dietetics, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medicine, Priority Research Centre in Physical Activity and Nutrition, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Callaghan NSW 2300, Australia.
B Institute of Food, Nutrition and Health, ETH Zürich, Universitaetstrasse 22, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland.
C Corresponding author. Email: Clare.Collins@newcastle.edu.au
Health Promotion Journal of Australia 26(2) 83-88 https://doi.org/10.1071/HE14061
Submitted: 7 July 2014 Accepted: 31 January 2015 Published: 28 April 2015
Issues addressed: It is not known whether individuals can accurately estimate the portion size of foods usually consumed relative to standard serving sizes in national food selection guides. The aim of the present cross-sectional pilot study was to quantify what adults and children deem a typical portion for a variety of foods and compare these with the serving sizes specified in the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating (AGHE).
Methods: Adults and children were independently asked to serve out their typical portion of 10 common foods (rice, pasta, breakfast cereal, chocolate, confectionary, ice cream, meat, vegetables, soft drink and milk). They were also asked to serve what they perceived a small, medium and large portion of each food to be. Each portion was weighed and recorded by an assessor and compared with the standard AGHE serving sizes.
Results: Twenty-one individuals (nine mothers, one father, 11 children) participated in the study. There was a large degree of variability in portion sizes measured out by both parents and children, with means exceeding the standard AGHE serving size for all items, except for soft drink and milk, where mean portion sizes were less than the AGHE serving size. The greatest mean overestimations were for pasta (155%; mean 116 g; range 94–139 g) and chocolate (151%; mean 38 g; range 25–50 g), each of which represented approximately 1.5 standard AGHE servings.
Conclusion: The findings of the present study indicate that there is variability between parents’ and children’s estimation of typical portion sizes compared with national recommendations.
So what?: Dietary interventions to improve individuals’ dietary patterns should target education regarding portion size.
Key words: children, parents, portion size perception, standard serving size.
References National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC). Australian dietary guidelines: providing the scientific evidence for healthier Australian diets. 2013. Available from: https://www.eatforhealth.gov.au/sites/default/files/files/the_guidelines/n55_australian_dietary_guidelines.pdf [Verified 8 April 2015].
 Wansink B (2004) Environmental factors that increase the food intake and consumption volume of unknowing consumers. Annu Rev Nutr 24, 455–79
| Environmental factors that increase the food intake and consumption volume of unknowing consumers.CrossRef | 15189128PubMed |
 Steenhuis IH, Vermeer WM (2009) Portion size: review and framework for interventions. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 6, 58
| Portion size: review and framework for interventions.CrossRef | 19698102PubMed |
 Kong A, Beresford S, Alfano C, Foster-Schubert K, Neuhouser M, Johnson D, et al (2012) Self-monitoring and eating-related behaviors are associated with 12-month weight loss in postmenopausal overweight-to-obese women. J Acad Nutr Diet 112, 1428–35.
| Self-monitoring and eating-related behaviors are associated with 12-month weight loss in postmenopausal overweight-to-obese women.CrossRef | 22795495PubMed |
 Frobisher C, Maxwell SM (2003) The estimation of food portion sizes: a comparison between using descriptions of portion sizes and a photographic food atlas by children and adults. J Hum Nutr Diet 16, 181–8.
| The estimation of food portion sizes: a comparison between using descriptions of portion sizes and a photographic food atlas by children and adults.CrossRef | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3s3jtFCjtQ%3D%3D&md5=529508f97c9b66d757c60cf64b46a418CAS | 12753111PubMed |
 Collins C, Watson J, Guest M, Boggess M, Duncanson K, Pezdirc K, et al (2013) Reproducibility and comparative validity of a food frequency questionnaire for adults. Clin Nutri Oct 9,
| Reproducibility and comparative validity of a food frequency questionnaire for adults.CrossRef |
 Collins CE, Burrows TL, Rollo ME, Boggess MM, Watson JF, Guest M, et al (2015) The comparative validity and reproducibility of a diet quality index for adults: the Australian Recommended Food Score. Nutrients 7, 785–98.
| The comparative validity and reproducibility of a diet quality index for adults: the Australian Recommended Food Score.CrossRef | 25625814PubMed |
 Benelam B (2009) Satiation, satiety and their effects on eating behavior. Nutr Bull 34, 126–73.
| Satiation, satiety and their effects on eating behavior.CrossRef |
 Burrows T, Warren J, Baur L, Collins C (2008) Impact of a child obesity intervention on dietary intake and behaviors. Int J Obes (Lond) 32, 1481–8.
 Burrows T, Morgan P, Lubans D, Callister R, Okley T, Bray J, et al (2012) Dietary outcomes of the Healthy Dads Healthy Kids randomised controlled trial. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 55, 408–11.
| Dietary outcomes of the Healthy Dads Healthy Kids randomised controlled trial.CrossRef | 22516862PubMed |
 Hodge A, Patterson AJ, Brown WJ, Ireland P, Giles G (2000) The Cancer Council of Victoira FFQ: relative validity of nutrient intakes compared with weighed food records in young to middle age women in a study of iron supplementation. Aust N Z J Public Health 24, 576–83.
| The Cancer Council of Victoira FFQ: relative validity of nutrient intakes compared with weighed food records in young to middle age women in a study of iron supplementation.CrossRef | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3M7kt1aisA%3D%3D&md5=8df500c55fd59bcf7fbed5cd81792d04CAS | 11215004PubMed |