Cargando…
Explaining the effect on food selection of altering availability: two experimental studies on the role of relative preferences
BACKGROUND: Increasing the availability of healthier or plant-based foods increases their selection. The current studies aimed to examine the extent to which relative preferences account for food selections following availability interventions. In particular, (a) whether increasing the availability...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9063226/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35501746 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13067-2 |
_version_ | 1784699119633170432 |
---|---|
author | Pechey, Rachel Hollands, Gareth J. Marteau, Theresa M. |
author_facet | Pechey, Rachel Hollands, Gareth J. Marteau, Theresa M. |
author_sort | Pechey, Rachel |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Increasing the availability of healthier or plant-based foods increases their selection. The current studies aimed to examine the extent to which relative preferences account for food selections following availability interventions. In particular, (a) whether increasing the availability of lower-energy options increases the likelihood that individuals’ highest-ranked option is lower-energy, and (b) the extent to which selections reflect individuals’ highest-ranked option from the available range. METHODS: UK adults (Study 1: n = 1976; Study 2: n = 1078) took part in within-subjects online studies. In both studies, the order of preference between food options was established by participants choosing the option that they would prefer “to eat right now” from every possible pairing within a pool of eight options. Then, participants were shown either predominantly higher-energy options (three higher- and one lower-energy) or predominantly lower-energy options (vice versa), presented in a random order. RESULTS: When predominantly lower-energy options were presented, the odds of the highest-ranked option being a lower-energy option increased ten-fold (Study 1: odds ratio: 10.1; 95%CI: 8.9,11.4; Study 2: odds ratio: 10.4; 95%CI: 7.4,14.7), compared to when predominantly higher-energy options were available. In both studies, around 90% of selections reflected the highest-ranked option in the range offered in the studied availability conditions (range 88–92%). CONCLUSIONS: These studies suggest that increased availability of lower-energy options increases the likelihood of an individual’s highest-ranked option being lower-energy, and that the highest-ranked option has the greatest likelihood of selection. As such, preferences may be a key contributor to the effects of altering availability on food selections. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN (http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN27598623; 3/12/19 [Study 1]; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN61010183; 20/4/20 [Study 2]). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-13067-2. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9063226 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90632262022-05-04 Explaining the effect on food selection of altering availability: two experimental studies on the role of relative preferences Pechey, Rachel Hollands, Gareth J. Marteau, Theresa M. BMC Public Health Research BACKGROUND: Increasing the availability of healthier or plant-based foods increases their selection. The current studies aimed to examine the extent to which relative preferences account for food selections following availability interventions. In particular, (a) whether increasing the availability of lower-energy options increases the likelihood that individuals’ highest-ranked option is lower-energy, and (b) the extent to which selections reflect individuals’ highest-ranked option from the available range. METHODS: UK adults (Study 1: n = 1976; Study 2: n = 1078) took part in within-subjects online studies. In both studies, the order of preference between food options was established by participants choosing the option that they would prefer “to eat right now” from every possible pairing within a pool of eight options. Then, participants were shown either predominantly higher-energy options (three higher- and one lower-energy) or predominantly lower-energy options (vice versa), presented in a random order. RESULTS: When predominantly lower-energy options were presented, the odds of the highest-ranked option being a lower-energy option increased ten-fold (Study 1: odds ratio: 10.1; 95%CI: 8.9,11.4; Study 2: odds ratio: 10.4; 95%CI: 7.4,14.7), compared to when predominantly higher-energy options were available. In both studies, around 90% of selections reflected the highest-ranked option in the range offered in the studied availability conditions (range 88–92%). CONCLUSIONS: These studies suggest that increased availability of lower-energy options increases the likelihood of an individual’s highest-ranked option being lower-energy, and that the highest-ranked option has the greatest likelihood of selection. As such, preferences may be a key contributor to the effects of altering availability on food selections. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN (http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN27598623; 3/12/19 [Study 1]; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN61010183; 20/4/20 [Study 2]). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-13067-2. BioMed Central 2022-04-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9063226/ /pubmed/35501746 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13067-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Pechey, Rachel Hollands, Gareth J. Marteau, Theresa M. Explaining the effect on food selection of altering availability: two experimental studies on the role of relative preferences |
title | Explaining the effect on food selection of altering availability: two experimental studies on the role of relative preferences |
title_full | Explaining the effect on food selection of altering availability: two experimental studies on the role of relative preferences |
title_fullStr | Explaining the effect on food selection of altering availability: two experimental studies on the role of relative preferences |
title_full_unstemmed | Explaining the effect on food selection of altering availability: two experimental studies on the role of relative preferences |
title_short | Explaining the effect on food selection of altering availability: two experimental studies on the role of relative preferences |
title_sort | explaining the effect on food selection of altering availability: two experimental studies on the role of relative preferences |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9063226/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35501746 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-13067-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pecheyrachel explainingtheeffectonfoodselectionofalteringavailabilitytwoexperimentalstudiesontheroleofrelativepreferences AT hollandsgarethj explainingtheeffectonfoodselectionofalteringavailabilitytwoexperimentalstudiesontheroleofrelativepreferences AT marteautheresam explainingtheeffectonfoodselectionofalteringavailabilitytwoexperimentalstudiesontheroleofrelativepreferences |