Comparing Designs for Restaurant "Eco-Labels"
Comparing Designs for Environmental Sustainability "Eco-Labels" for Restaurant Menus
1 other identifier
interventional
2,207
1 country
1
Brief Summary
The aim of this study is to compare responses to 5 different types of labels for restaurant menus: 1) Control (non-sustainability-label: neutral labels not referencing environmental sustainability); 2) Numeric text-only sustainability label; 3) Endorsement text-only sustainability label; 4) Endorsement icon-only sustainability label; 5) Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability label. Participants will be randomized to 1 of the 5 labeling arms above. Each participant will view 3 labels (shown in random order) from their randomly assigned labeling arm and respond to survey questions about each label (e.g., attention, perceived effectiveness).
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for not_applicable
Started Aug 2023
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
July 11, 2023
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
July 20, 2023
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
August 7, 2023
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
August 7, 2023
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
August 7, 2023
CompletedAugust 16, 2023
August 1, 2023
Same day
July 11, 2023
August 15, 2023
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Perceived message effectiveness
Participants will rate the extent to which the label makes them want to choose items with the label on a 5-point scale ranging from low (1) to high (5). They will also rate the extent to which the label makes eating items with the label seem appealing to them on a 5-point scale ranging from low (1) to high (5). These items are adapted from the 3-item UNC Perceived Message Effectiveness scale. Investigators will average responses to these two items to create a perceived message effectiveness score, which will also range from low (1) to high (5). Higher scores therefore indicate higher perceived message effectiveness.
The survey will take up to 20 minutes
Secondary Outcomes (4)
Attention
The survey will take up to 20 minutes
Thinking about environmental effects
The survey will take up to 20 minutes
Anticipated social interactions
The survey will take up to 20 minutes
Believability
The survey will take up to 20 minutes
Study Arms (5)
Neutral labels
ACTIVE COMPARATORLabels shown will be QR codes with and without neutral text (i.e., not mentioning environmental impacts)
Numeric text-only sustainability labels
EXPERIMENTALLabels shown will contain numeric text depicting the greenhouse gas emissions associated with production of the menu item
Endorsement text-only sustainability labels
EXPERIMENTALLabels shown will contain text endorsing menu items as having low environmental impact
Endorsement icon-only sustainability labels
EXPERIMENTALLabels shown will contain icons endorsing menu items as having low environmental impact
Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability labels
EXPERIMENTALLabels shown will contain both text and icons endorsing menu items as having low environmental impact
Interventions
Participants view neutral labels (QR codes with and without neutral text) for menu items
Participants view labels with numeric text depicting the greenhouse gas emissions associated with production of the menu item
Participants view labels using text to endorse menu items as having low environmental impact
Participants view labels using icons to endorse menu items as having low environmental impact
Participants view labels using text and icons to endorse menu items as having low environmental impact
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Participants will be US adults
- Ages 18 or older
- With an over-sample of adults (50% of total sample) 18-29 years
You may not qualify if:
- Younger than 18
- Non-US
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
- Stanford Universitylead
- Harvard Pilgrim Health Carecollaborator
Study Sites (1)
Stanford School of Medicine
Palo Alto, California, 94304, United States
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Anna H Grummon, PhD
Assistant Professor
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- PREVENTION
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Assistant Professor
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
July 11, 2023
First Posted
July 20, 2023
Study Start
August 7, 2023
Primary Completion
August 7, 2023
Study Completion
August 7, 2023
Last Updated
August 16, 2023
Record last verified: 2023-08
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will share
- Shared Documents
- SAP
- Time Frame
- Starting 6 months after publication
- Access Criteria
- Public
In the consenting process, participants agreed that de-identified data produced from this project may be distributed for future research studies without additional informed consent. After analysis, we will upload the de-identified data to ResearchBox for public sharing.