Lindsey Smith Taillie1, Shu Wen Ng2, Ya Xue3, Matthew Harding4. 1. Carolina Population Center, Dept. of Nutrition, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 137 E Franklin St, CB #8120, Chapel Hill, NC 27514, USA. Electronic address: smithlp@email.unc.edu. 2. Carolina Population Center, Dept. of Nutrition, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 137 E Franklin St, CB #8120, Chapel Hill, NC 27514, USA. 3. Duke-UNC USDA Center for Behavioral Economics and Healthy Food Choice Research, 140 Science Drive, 230P Gross Hall, Duke University, Box 90989, Durham, NC 27708-0989, USA. 4. Dept. of Economics, University of California, 3207 Social Science Plaza B, Irvine, CA 92697, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study examines trends in the prevalence of price promotions among packaged food and beverage purchases, differences in prevalence by household race/ethnicity or income, and the association between price promotions and the nutritional profile of purchases. DESIGN: This cross-sectional study utilizes a dataset of 90 million purchases from 38,744 (2008) to 45,042 (2012) US households in 2008-2012. Chi-square tests were used to examine whether the proportion of purchases with price promotions changed over time or differed by household race/ethnicity or income. T-tests were used to compare purchased products' nutritional profiles. RESULTS: Prevalence of price promotions among packaged food and beverage purchases increased by 8% and 6%, respectively, from 2008 to 2012, with both reaching 34% by 2012. Higher-income households had greater proportions of purchases with price promotions than lower-income households. Asian households had the highest proportion of purchases with any price promotion, followed by non-Hispanic whites. While total price-promoted packaged food purchases had higher mean energy, total sugar, and saturated fat densities than purchases with no price promotions, absolute differences were small. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of price promotions among US household purchases increased from 2008 to 2012 and was greater for higher-income households. No clear associations emerged between presence of price promotions and nutritional quality of purchases.
OBJECTIVE: This study examines trends in the prevalence of price promotions among packaged food and beverage purchases, differences in prevalence by household race/ethnicity or income, and the association between price promotions and the nutritional profile of purchases. DESIGN: This cross-sectional study utilizes a dataset of 90 million purchases from 38,744 (2008) to 45,042 (2012) US households in 2008-2012. Chi-square tests were used to examine whether the proportion of purchases with price promotions changed over time or differed by household race/ethnicity or income. T-tests were used to compare purchased products' nutritional profiles. RESULTS: Prevalence of price promotions among packaged food and beverage purchases increased by 8% and 6%, respectively, from 2008 to 2012, with both reaching 34% by 2012. Higher-income households had greater proportions of purchases with price promotions than lower-income households. Asian households had the highest proportion of purchases with any price promotion, followed by non-Hispanic whites. While total price-promoted packaged food purchases had higher mean energy, total sugar, and saturated fat densities than purchases with no price promotions, absolute differences were small. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of price promotions among US household purchases increased from 2008 to 2012 and was greater for higher-income households. No clear associations emerged between presence of price promotions and nutritional quality of purchases.
Authors: Tony Blakely; Cliona Ni Mhurchu; Yannan Jiang; Leonie Matoe; Mafi Funaki-Tahifote; Helen C Eyles; Rachel H Foster; Sarah McKenzie; Anthony Rodgers Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health Date: 2011-02-04 Impact factor: 3.710
Authors: Leonard H Epstein; Kelly K Dearing; Elizabeth A Handley; James N Roemmich; Rocco A Paluch Journal: Appetite Date: 2006-05-06 Impact factor: 3.868
Authors: Amelie A Hecht; Crystal L Perez; Michele Polascek; Anne N Thorndike; Rebecca L Franckle; Alyssa J Moran Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-10-10 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Chelsea R Singleton; Megan Winkler; Bailey Houghtaling; Oluwafikayo S Adeyemi; Alexandra M Roehll; J J Pionke; Elizabeth Anderson Steeves Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-10-21 Impact factor: 3.390