Aviva A Musicus1, Sophia V Hua2, Marlene B Schwartz3, Jason P Block4, Frances K Barg5, Christina D Economos6, Karen Glanz5, James W Krieger7, Christina A Roberto8. 1. Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: aam231@mail.harvard.edu. 2. Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. UConn Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity, University of Connecticut, Hartford, Connecticut. 4. Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 6. Division of Nutrition Interventions, Communication, and Behavior Change, Gerald J. and Dorothy R. Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Tufts University, Boston, Massachusetts. 7. Department of Health Services, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 8. Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Calorie labeling is now required on all large U.S. chain restaurant menus, but its influence on consumer behavior is mixed. This study examines whether different parent-targeted messages encourage parents to order lower-calorie meals for their children in a hypothetical online setting. METHODS: An online RCT was conducted with sociodemographically diverse primary caregivers of children aged 6-12 years (data collected and analyzed in 2017-2019). Participants (N=2,373) were randomized to see 1 of 4 messages: (1) nonfood control, (2) kids' meals are the right size for children, (3) doctors recommend a 600 kcal per meal limit for kids, or (4) 600 kcal per meal is a generally recommended limit for kids. Participants ordered hypothetical meals for their children and themselves and rated meal and message perceptions. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between conditions in calories ordered for children at either restaurant, although all 3 food message conditions ordered fewer calories for their children than the control (full service: 27-68 fewer kcal, fast food: 18-64 fewer kcal). The general 600 kcal/meal limit message consistently performed best across outcomes, encouraging parents to order the fewest calories for their children at both restaurants (5%-7% fewer) and significantly increasing their understanding of calorie recommendations for kids' meals. It also significantly reduced fast-food calories parents ordered for themselves compared with the control (-106 kcal, p=0.042). CONCLUSIONS: Although no statistically significant differences were detected, messages with specific calorie recommendations for kids led parents to order lower-calorie restaurant meals for their children, suggesting that additional real-world studies with larger sample sizes are warranted.
INTRODUCTION: Calorie labeling is now required on all large U.S. chain restaurant menus, but its influence on consumer behavior is mixed. This study examines whether different parent-targeted messages encourage parents to order lower-calorie meals for their children in a hypothetical online setting. METHODS: An online RCT was conducted with sociodemographically diverse primary caregivers of children aged 6-12 years (data collected and analyzed in 2017-2019). Participants (N=2,373) were randomized to see 1 of 4 messages: (1) nonfood control, (2) kids' meals are the right size for children, (3) doctors recommend a 600 kcal per meal limit for kids, or (4) 600 kcal per meal is a generally recommended limit for kids. Participants ordered hypothetical meals for their children and themselves and rated meal and message perceptions. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between conditions in calories ordered for children at either restaurant, although all 3 food message conditions ordered fewer calories for their children than the control (full service: 27-68 fewer kcal, fast food: 18-64 fewer kcal). The general 600 kcal/meal limit message consistently performed best across outcomes, encouraging parents to order the fewest calories for their children at both restaurants (5%-7% fewer) and significantly increasing their understanding of calorie recommendations for kids' meals. It also significantly reduced fast-food calories parents ordered for themselves compared with the control (-106 kcal, p=0.042). CONCLUSIONS: Although no statistically significant differences were detected, messages with specific calorie recommendations for kids led parents to order lower-calorie restaurant meals for their children, suggesting that additional real-world studies with larger sample sizes are warranted.
Authors: Ana C Fernandes; Renata C Oliveira; Rossana P C Proença; Cintia C Curioni; Vanessa M Rodrigues; Giovanna M R Fiates Journal: Nutr Rev Date: 2016-08 Impact factor: 7.110
Authors: Pooja S Tandon; Chuan Zhou; Nadine L Chan; Paula Lozano; Sarah C Couch; Karen Glanz; James Krieger; Brian E Saelens Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Sophia V Hua; Kimberly Sterner-Stein; Frances K Barg; Aviva A Musicus; Karen Glanz; Marlene B Schwartz; Jason P Block; Christina D Economos; James W Krieger; Christina A Roberto Journal: J Acad Nutr Diet Date: 2020-11 Impact factor: 4.910