BACKGROUND:Children's vegetable consumption is below recommended amounts. According to self-determination theory, stimulating children's feelings of autonomy by offering a choice of vegetables may be a valuable strategy to increase their vegetable liking and consumption. The effect of choice-offering on children's vegetable liking and consumption has, to our knowledge, not yet been studied. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to investigate whether having a choice between 2 vegetables enhances children's vegetable liking and consumption. DESIGN:Three hundred three children (age: 4-6 y) were randomly assigned to receive 1 of 3 dinner conditions in a restaurant setting. Two similarly liked vegetables were presented, after which the child had no choice, a premeal choice, or an at-meal choice. Subsequently, the dinner was consumed with one parent present. Comparisons between the 3 conditions regarding children's meal experience, vegetable liking, and vegetable consumption were made by using analysis of variance and Kruskal-Wallis tests. RESULTS:Children's vegetable consumption did not differ (P = 0.54) between the conditions as follows: 56 + or - 45 g in the no-choice condition, 51 + or - 46 g in the premeal-choice condition, and 49 + or - 47 g in the at-meal-choice condition. In the no-choice condition, high-reactant children (who are more sensitive to psychological, persuasive pressure) consumed fewer vegetables (45 + or - 42 g) than did low-reactant children (73 + or - 43 g; P = 0.04). Vegetable liking was similar in all 3 conditions (P = 0.43). Children appreciated being able to choose in the premeal-choice condition. CONCLUSIONS: A premeal choice between 2 vegetables was appreciated by the children but did not increase their vegetable liking and consumption. The no-choice condition decreased vegetable consumption in high-reactant children. Future research should investigate the effects of choice-offering in the long term and in more familiar eating settings. This trial was registered at controlled-trials.com as ISRCTN03035138.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Children's vegetable consumption is below recommended amounts. According to self-determination theory, stimulating children's feelings of autonomy by offering a choice of vegetables may be a valuable strategy to increase their vegetable liking and consumption. The effect of choice-offering on children's vegetable liking and consumption has, to our knowledge, not yet been studied. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to investigate whether having a choice between 2 vegetables enhances children's vegetable liking and consumption. DESIGN: Three hundred three children (age: 4-6 y) were randomly assigned to receive 1 of 3 dinner conditions in a restaurant setting. Two similarly liked vegetables were presented, after which the child had no choice, a premeal choice, or an at-meal choice. Subsequently, the dinner was consumed with one parent present. Comparisons between the 3 conditions regarding children's meal experience, vegetable liking, and vegetable consumption were made by using analysis of variance and Kruskal-Wallis tests. RESULTS:Children's vegetable consumption did not differ (P = 0.54) between the conditions as follows: 56 + or - 45 g in the no-choice condition, 51 + or - 46 g in the premeal-choice condition, and 49 + or - 47 g in the at-meal-choice condition. In the no-choice condition, high-reactant children (who are more sensitive to psychological, persuasive pressure) consumed fewer vegetables (45 + or - 42 g) than did low-reactant children (73 + or - 43 g; P = 0.04). Vegetable liking was similar in all 3 conditions (P = 0.43). Children appreciated being able to choose in the premeal-choice condition. CONCLUSIONS: A premeal choice between 2 vegetables was appreciated by the children but did not increase their vegetable liking and consumption. The no-choice condition decreased vegetable consumption in high-reactant children. Future research should investigate the effects of choice-offering in the long term and in more familiar eating settings. This trial was registered at controlled-trials.com as ISRCTN03035138.
Authors: Denise M Feda; Maya J Lambiase; Thomas F McCarthy; Jacob E Barkley; James N Roemmich Journal: J Sci Med Sport Date: 2012-02-17 Impact factor: 4.319
Authors: Rebecca K Hodder; Kate M O'Brien; Fiona G Stacey; Flora Tzelepis; Rebecca J Wyse; Kate M Bartlem; Rachel Sutherland; Erica L James; Courtney Barnes; Luke Wolfenden Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-11-07
Authors: Gareth J Hollands; Patrice Carter; Sumayya Anwer; Sarah E King; Susan A Jebb; David Ogilvie; Ian Shemilt; Julian P T Higgins; Theresa M Marteau Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-09-04
Authors: Gareth J Hollands; Patrice Carter; Sumayya Anwer; Sarah E King; Susan A Jebb; David Ogilvie; Ian Shemilt; Julian P T Higgins; Theresa M Marteau Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-08-27
Authors: Rebecca K Hodder; Fiona G Stacey; Kate M O'Brien; Rebecca J Wyse; Tara Clinton-McHarg; Flora Tzelepis; Erica L James; Kate M Bartlem; Nicole K Nathan; Rachel Sutherland; Emma Robson; Sze Lin Yoong; Luke Wolfenden Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-01-25
Authors: Rebecca K Hodder; Kate M O'Brien; Fiona G Stacey; Rebecca J Wyse; Tara Clinton-McHarg; Flora Tzelepis; Erica L James; Kate M Bartlem; Nicole K Nathan; Rachel Sutherland; Emma Robson; Sze Lin Yoong; Luke Wolfenden Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-05-17