Upload
yuefengbenjamin-pan
View
150
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
S
Why do people still make unhealthy choice even when they have
nutrition facts on fast food menus?
Presenter :Yuefeng PanMentor: Catherine A. Cole
Tippie Research Fair Januray, 27th,2015
2
Study 1As reported by Dr. Christina
A. Roberto and her colleagues
Objective: Assessed the impact of restaurant menu calorie labels on food choices and intake
Three Conditions: A menu without calorie labels (no calorie labels) A menu with calorie labels (calorie labels) A menu with calorie labels and a label stating the recommended
daily caloric intake for an average adult (calorie labels plus information).
3
Study 1As reported by Dr. Christina
A. Roberto and her colleagues Procedure
Participants were 303 members of the New Haven, Connecticut, community recruited be- tween August 2007 and August 2008 via flyers, word of mouth, newspaper advertisements, and craigslist.com postings. The only exclusion criterion was age younger than 18 years. All participants provided written informed consent.
Three Version of menus: No calorie label, Calorie label and Calorie label plus information
DVs:1) Total calories ordered2) Total calories consumed3) Total postdinner calories4) Dinner plus postdiner calories5) Difference in estimated and actual calories
consumed
Dietary Recall Interview the next day.
Self-Reported demographic information by participants
4
Study 1As reported by Dr. Christina
A. Roberto and her colleagues
No Calo
rie La
bel
Calor
ie Lab
el Only
Calor
ie Lab
el Plus
Inform
ation
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500 2189.371862.23 1859.7
Total calories ordered
Total calories orderedPolynomial (Total calories ordered)
5
Results
Conclusion: Calorie labels on restaurant menus impacted food choices and intake; adding a recommended daily caloric requirement label increased this effect, suggesting menu label legislation should require such a label
In Study 2: We want to incorporate nutrition knowledge—our hypothesis is that whether the effect observed in study 1 will be stronger for high knowledge consumers).
6
Study 2
Hypothesis: High knowledge people will not be as influenced by calorie information on menus as low knowledge people.
Study 2 DV:
1. Total Calories Ordered
2. Perceived Healthiness
3. Error between perceived calorie consumption and actual calorie consumption
IVs:
1. Different version of menus
2. Different nutrition knowledge level
8
Study 2 Method
Amazon Mechanical Turks 277 total – 42 pretest= 235 valid Number of eliminated: (1)Who have not finished the survey: 18 subjects (2)Who finished the survey within 3min(mean=382.91s,
SD=182.71s): 14 subjects (3)Who doesn’t meet the screening criteria 58 subjectsFinal subjects: 145
Independent Variable
1. Two versions of menu
Menu with Calorie info
Menu without Calorie info
2. Nutrition Knowledge(Nutrition Grade)
High knowledge
Low knowledge
10
Independent Variable 1
Different Version of Fast Food Menu: V1: Menu with Calorie Information V2: Menu without Calorie Information
11
Nostalgic Ad
Calories Ad
Control Ad
Control Ad
13
Independent Variable 2
Nutrition Grade for the quiz: 14 questions in total, get 1 point when answer is right
14
Grades Distribution Table
15
Grades Distribution Graph
Use 8 point as cut up points:
Group 1(Low Knowledge): Grades ≦ 8
Group 2(High Knowledge): Grades > 8
16
Dependent Variable 1
Which Sandwich Would You Choose? (Actual Calories Consumption):
Cheese Burger 330 Cal Hamburger 280 CalFish Filet 470 CalCrispy Chicken 550 CalGrilled Chicken 450 CalDouble Quarter Pounder 760 CalDV1: Actual number of Calorie
17
Dependent Variable 2
Absolute Error: Absolute value between perceptual calorie consumption and actual calorie consumption
DV2: AbsoluteDifferece=|Actual Calorie - Perceived Calorie|
18
Dependent Variable 3
Perceived Healthiness
DV3: Healthy M=average of the above items
19
Dependent Variable 4
Likelihood of visiting
DV4: LikelyhoodVisiting
20
Next page is…
When 0-8 belongs to low knowledge group 1 When 9-13 belongs to high knowledge group 2
21
Results 1---Calories Ordered
22
Result 2---Absolute Difference between the calories ordered and the estimated calories
23
Absolute Difference
NewMenu=0, P<0.138, t=1.498
NewMenu=1, P<0.367, t=0.909
Group=1, P<0.016, t=2.481
Group=2, P<0.000, t=4.445
24
Result 3---perceived healthiness of the restaurant
25
Perceived healthiness of the menu
NewMenu=0, P<0.044, t=2.044
NewMenu=1, P<0.035, t=-2.157
Group=1, P<0.012, t=2.585
Group=2, P<0.091, t=-1.708
26
Result 4---Likelihood of visit
27
Likelihood Visit
NewMenu=0, P<0.097, t=1.679
NewMenu=1, P<0.071, t=-1.835
Group=1, P<0.072, t=1.837
Group=2, P<0.09, t=-1.716
28
Conclusion
29
Summary
Low knowledge consumers High Knowledge consumers
-Absolute Difference-Perceived healthiness-Visiting
30
Limitations
We didn’t track their actual behavior We tried to eliminate the people who didn’t pay
attention, but there’s no guarantee Mturks
31
Next page is…
When 0-9 belongs to low knowledge group 1 When 10-13 belongs to high knowledge group 2
32
Results 1---Calories Ordered
33
Result 2---Absolute Difference between the calories ordered and the estimated calories
34
Absolute Difference
NewMenu=0, P<0.068, t=1.851
NewMenu=1, P<0.839, t=-0.204
Group=1, P<0.000, t=3.818
Group=2, P<0.007, t=2.785
35
Result 3---perceived healthiness of the restaurant
36
Perceived healthiness of the menu
NewMenu=0, P<0.105, t=1.640
NewMenu=1, P<0.023, t=-2.329
Group=1, P<0.055, t=1.945
Group=2, P<0.049, t=-2.013
37
Result 4---Likelihood of visit
38
Likelihood Visit
NewMenu=0, P<0.395, t=0.856
NewMenu=1, P<0.132, t=-1.526
Group=1, P<0.376, t=0.890
Group=2, P<0.154, t=-1.448