Selena E Ortiz1, Frederick J Zimmerman2, Gary J Adler3. 1. Department of Health Policy and Administration, College of Health and Human Development, The Pennsylvania State University, 601L Ford Building, University Park, PA 16802, USA. Electronic address: seortiz@psu.edu. 2. Department of Health Policy and Management, UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, UCLA, BOX 951772, 31-236B CHS, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA. Electronic address: fredzimmerman@ucla.edu. 3. Department of Sociology and Criminology, College of the Liberal Arts, The Pennsylvania State University, 514 Oswald Tower, University Park, PA 16802, USA. Electronic address: gary.adler@psu.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Support for policies to combat obesity is often undermined by a public sense that obesity is largely a matter of personal responsibility. Industry rhetoric is a major contributor to this perception, as the soda/fast food/big food companies emphasize choice and individual agency in their efforts to neutralize policies that are burdensome. Yet obesity experts recognize that environmental forces play a major role in obesity. We investigate whether exposure to a taste-engineering frame increases support for food and beverage policies that address obesity. A taste-engineering frame details strategies used by the food industry to engineer preferences and increase the over-consumption of processed foods and sugary beverages. We also examine the effects of exposure to two contextualized values that have recently been promoted in expert discourse-consumer knowledge and consumer safety - on public support of policies. Our research shows how causal frames and contextualized values may effectively produce support for new obesity policies. METHODS: We use an online survey experiment to test the effects of exposure to a taste-engineering frame (TEF), the value of consumer knowledge (CK), or the value of consumer safety (CS), on level of support for a range of policies. A random sample of adults, age 18 + living in the United States was included in the study (N = 2580). Ordered logistic regression was used to measure the effects of treatment exposure. The primary outcome was level-of-support for four (4) food-industry related, obesity prevention policies (aka food and beverage policies): 1) require food-manufacturers to disclose the amount of additives in food products on food packaging; 2) require food-manufacturers to advertise food products in accordance with their actual nutritional value; 3) prohibit all high-fat, high-sugar food advertising on television programming watched primarily by children; and 4) increase healthy food availability in work sites, schools, and hospitals. FINDINGS: These data suggest that a taste-engineering frame and contextualized values significantly increase public support for many of the food and beverage policies tested. CONCLUSIONS: Applying a taste-engineering frame and/or contextualized values to address obesity advances a population-based policy agenda to counteract the effects of food-industry strategies.
BACKGROUND: Support for policies to combat obesity is often undermined by a public sense that obesity is largely a matter of personal responsibility. Industry rhetoric is a major contributor to this perception, as the soda/fast food/big food companies emphasize choice and individual agency in their efforts to neutralize policies that are burdensome. Yet obesity experts recognize that environmental forces play a major role in obesity. We investigate whether exposure to a taste-engineering frame increases support for food and beverage policies that address obesity. A taste-engineering frame details strategies used by the food industry to engineer preferences and increase the over-consumption of processed foods and sugary beverages. We also examine the effects of exposure to two contextualized values that have recently been promoted in expert discourse-consumer knowledge and consumer safety - on public support of policies. Our research shows how causal frames and contextualized values may effectively produce support for new obesity policies. METHODS: We use an online survey experiment to test the effects of exposure to a taste-engineering frame (TEF), the value of consumer knowledge (CK), or the value of consumer safety (CS), on level of support for a range of policies. A random sample of adults, age 18 + living in the United States was included in the study (N = 2580). Ordered logistic regression was used to measure the effects of treatment exposure. The primary outcome was level-of-support for four (4) food-industry related, obesity prevention policies (aka food and beverage policies): 1) require food-manufacturers to disclose the amount of additives in food products on food packaging; 2) require food-manufacturers to advertise food products in accordance with their actual nutritional value; 3) prohibit all high-fat, high-sugar food advertising on television programming watched primarily by children; and 4) increase healthy food availability in work sites, schools, and hospitals. FINDINGS: These data suggest that a taste-engineering frame and contextualized values significantly increase public support for many of the food and beverage policies tested. CONCLUSIONS: Applying a taste-engineering frame and/or contextualized values to address obesity advances a population-based policy agenda to counteract the effects of food-industry strategies.
Authors: Jonathan Purtle; Félice Lê-Scherban; X I Wang; Paul T Shattuck; Enola K Proctor; Ross C Brownson Journal: Milbank Q Date: 2019-11-11 Impact factor: 4.911
Authors: Lira Yun; Leigh Vanderloo; Tanya R Berry; Amy E Latimer-Cheung; Norman O'Reilly; Ryan E Rhodes; John C Spence; Mark S Tremblay; Guy Faulkner Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2018-11-27 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: James P Reynolds; Milica Vasiljevic; Mark Pilling; Marissa G Hall; Kurt M Ribisl; Theresa M Marteau Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-09-08 Impact factor: 3.390