Karol Jablonski 

Professor Serhiy Metenko

English 21007

March 20, 2025

Lab Report Analysis

Introduction:

In this lab report I expect to learn the impacts that fast food has on health, obesity and the mental impact it can also have. I also expect to learn if there is a correlation between behavior practices and the mental health state of people. I also will learn how to dissect apart research papers and know what to look for when reading them and be able to tell a good paper apart from one that is not. 

Lab Report 1: “The Relationship between Junk Food Consumption, Healthy Nutrition, and Obesity among Children Aged 7 to 8 Years in Mersin, Turkey”

Lab Report 2: “Contribution of Obesity in the Association between Fast-Food Consumption and Depression: A Mediation Analysis.”

 

Title

Both lab titles are effective and appropriate with clarity; however, they have different purposes. For instance, Lab Report 1 has a more specific nature as it includes the population studied (children 7-8 years old from Mersin, Turkey), making this a situational study. However, it is a little wordy and takes longer to get through, so for clarity, it may affect understanding. Lab Report 2 is more concise, with a title based upon the methods, therefore, this title gets to the point of what it attempts to do. It also implies a more sophisticated level of analysis for the scientific community, inferring that obesity and depression have behavior and mental health-related outcomes. Both are effective in their own way but Lab Report 2 is clearer and more investigative, while Lab Report 1 is informative.

Abstract
The abstract in Lab Report 1 is both clear and complicated, and can be overwhelming, because it is difficult to follow and filled with numbers. It has good information about junk food and those who eat it, those who exercise, and children who are obese, however there is a lot and it is easy for a reader to lose track of what the main idea was. The abstract in Lab Report 2 provides better understanding and makes it easier to read. It is easier to grasp that there is a strong relationship between fast food, depression and obesity. Ultimately, both studies present their findings, but, Lab Report 2 has the more impactful one.

Introduction

Lab Report 1 introduction is longer, it includes many different factors of how and why children eat what they do, ranging from socioeconomic status to world population fast food junkies. While it gives the reader a lot of information, it is overwhelming. The Lab Report 2 intro is shorter, it quickly gets to the point of whether fast food makes people depressed in a clearer manner. It lacks the vital information that would assess eating fast food on a more diverse scale and its impact on more than just the person assessed. Both introductions do a good job of setting the scene for what each experiment is going to study, Lab Report 1 has a broad overview and Lab Report 2 has a more narrowed focus.

Materials and Methods

Lab Report 1 is much more descriptive, as it has a clearer, step-by-step approach to the method that was used, explains who the participants are, what their roles were, and how they collected the data. The section was labeled “Methods and Materials” making it easy to locate and navigate. The language is simple and transparent. It has lots of information regarding the instruments used and the analysis. Lab Report 2, in contrast has a more formal tone, presents a clear hypothesis but then relies on reading between the lines to understand the variables being used. The section was also labeled “Methods” indicating before even reading that there would not be any descriptive section about the materials used. More advanced terms such as, “mediation analysis,” “natural direct effect,” and “natural indirect effect” all come up without any explanation to the terminology, but it is justified because it is a journal for more advanced researchers who are more accustomed to such variables. It presents a more detailed table of contents with subheadings guiding the analysis. 

Results

Lab Report 1 gives a more formal, chronological assembly of findings as the reader is  given straight data (median, percentiles, breakdowns of cohort group) with little additional explanation. The data is given more straightforward and is easier to analyze, but there is less of an explanation given for that data. Lab Report 2 is much easier to comprehend as it does not only present the findings but also explain them which complicates understanding, but allows for greater comprehension for more advanced readers, or the scientific community. 

Discussion

The purpose of a discussion section is to allow the researcher to interpret and understand the meaning of the results of the research. The discussion in Lab Report 1 is clearer and more concise. It is straightforward and flows easier. For example, “It was found that JFC has increased 5-fold in the past 3 decades because of reasons such as taste, variety, and low prices,” acknowledges the finding and does not overwhelm the reader with too much information. It also acknowledges more relatable situations, like children reporting that they eat more because they like fast food more, making the reader recall his own experiences making these decisions more likely. The discussion in Lab Report 2  is more formal, detailing specific studies and research terminology. For example, it states, “Chronic inflammation has emerged as a potential mediator in the relationship between diet and depression,” which relies on the reader’s ability to comprehend. It also notes citations (Pagliai et al., 2021b) and references to pro-inflammatory cytokines and gut microbiota which make it more researched and specific, also requiring a higher understanding from the reader. Both papers provide a good discussion section, tending to their appropriate audiences. 

Conclusion 

The Lab Report 1 conclusion is more action-based while the second is more theoretical. It recaps the findings and suggests action by highlighting a finding that needs intervention. Researchers of the first study seek additional research in the field to determine whether healthy eating leads to junk food consumption or the other way around. The Lab Report 2 does not provide a clearly labeled conclusion section. Instead it can be found at the end of the discussion section. It is more theoretical, acknowledging that while the study is significant in determining a correlation of fast food and depression,  it means a mental health focus is needed involving personal weight issues and better eating. 

References

Both Lab Report 1 and Lab Report 2 provide several references, both in APA style. The references are both in their own clearly labeled sections. Lab Report 1 fails to organize the references in alphabetical order while Lab Report 2 organizes them alphabetically. 

Self-Reflection:

Thanks to this assignment, I learned how to properly read and understand a research paper. Breaking down a paper into eight segments taught me what each part should consist of and what I need to look for. I also learned how to use the CCNY library database efficiently to find information that I am looking for. I chose this topic to research as fast-food is huge in today’s society, especially in America, and America is also known to have the highest obesity population in the world, and most health issues. Fast-food and health has a direct relationship and I will definitely be cutting down the amount of fast food that I eat. 

References:

Güven, Yasemin, and Emine Öncü. “The Relationship between Junk Food Consumption, Healthy Nutrition, and Obesity among Children Aged 7 to 8 Years in Mersin, Turkey.” Nutrition Research, vol. 103, July 2022, pp. 1–10. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.ccny-proxy1.libr.ccny.cuny.edu/10.1016/j.nutres.2022.03.004.

Shafiee, Arman, et al. “Contribution of Obesity in the Association between Fast-Food Consumption and Depression: A Mediation Analysis.” Journal of Affective Disorders, vol. 362, Oct. 2024, pp. 623–29. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.ccny-proxy1.libr.ccny.cuny.edu/10.1016/j.jad.2024.07.036.