Nudging Nutrition With Monetary Incentives Environmental Cues

NCT02461108 | Completed

• 2 other identifiers: 11100024911RC1HD063370-01
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 221
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

The investigators hypothesize that monetary incentives and messaging, such as making nutritious foods relatively less expensive than less nutritious foods and framing the price difference in a positive or negative way, will influence purchasing behavior of households.

Conditions

Obesity; Food Labeling; Health Behavior; Diet

Keywords

Public policy; Food choice; Nutrition labeling; Fat tax; Vegetable subsidy; Behavioral economics; Health behavior

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Change in expenditures on nutritious and less nutritious foods

  Item level transaction data were collected for each participant between mid-July 2010 and mid-March 2011. These data included expenditures on all items purchased in the store. Average weekly expenditures were generated and reported in Aug 2011.

  8 months

Secondary Outcomes (2)

• Change in quantities purchased of nutritious and less nutritious foods

  8 months

• Change in expenditures on nutritious and less nutritious foods in specific food categories.

  8 months

Study Arms (2)

Price difference

EXPERIMENTAL

Introduce a 10% price difference between foods labeled as nutritious and foods labeled as less nutritious and frame the price difference as either a Subsidy, Tax, or combination of a Tax and Subsidy.

Behavioral: Subsidy; Behavioral: Tax; Behavioral: Tax and subsidy

No price difference

NO INTERVENTION

No price difference between nutritious and less nutritious foods.

Interventions

Subsidy BEHAVIORAL

Frame the price difference as a 10% subsidy on nutritious food items.

Price difference

Tax BEHAVIORAL

Frame the price difference as a 10% tax on less nutritious food items.

Price difference

Tax and subsidy BEHAVIORAL

Frame the price difference as a 5% tax on less nutritious food items and a 5% subsidy on nutritious food items, creating a 10% relative price difference between the types of foods.

Price difference

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years - 70 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Loyalty card shoppers at Hannaford grocery stores

You may not qualify if:

• No children in household
• Less than 75% of food purchases made at Hannaford grocery stores

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Cornell University: lead
• National Institutes of Health (NIH): collaborator
• Ohio State University: collaborator
• Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD): collaborator

Study Sites (1)

New York City School District

New York, New York, United States

Location

Related Publications (1)

• Pope L, Hanks AS, Just DR, Wansink B. New Year's res-illusions: food shopping in the new year competes with healthy intentions. PLoS One. 2014 Dec 16;9(12):e110561. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0110561. eCollection 2014.

  PMID: 25514158 RESULT

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Obesity; Health Behavior

Interventions

Taxes

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Overweight; Overnutrition; Nutrition Disorders; Nutritional and Metabolic Diseases; Body Weight; Signs and Symptoms; Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms; Behavior

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Economics; Health Care Economics and Organizations

Study Officials

• Brian Wansink, PhD

  Cornell University

  STUDY DIRECTOR

• David Just, PhD

  Cornell University

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: DOUBLE
• Who Masked: PARTICIPANT, INVESTIGATOR
• Intervention Model: FACTORIAL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: June 1, 2015
• First Posted: June 3, 2015
• Study Start: May 1, 2010
• Primary Completion: March 1, 2011
• Study Completion: April 1, 2011
• Last Updated: June 3, 2015

Record last verified: 2015-06

Locations

US (1)