Using a divider nudge in supermarket shopping trolleys to increase fruit and vegetable purchases: A feasibility study using an intervention design.

IF 3.6 4区 医学 Q3 NUTRITION & DIETETICS Nutrition Bulletin Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-21 DOI:10.1111/nbu.12642
Greg McGrath
{"title":"Using a divider nudge in supermarket shopping trolleys to increase fruit and vegetable purchases: A feasibility study using an intervention design.","authors":"Greg McGrath","doi":"10.1111/nbu.12642","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Fruit and vegetable (F&V) consumption is associated with a reduced risk of developing obesity and chronic diseases: however, only one in 16 Australian adults consume F&Vs at the recommended two servings of fruit and five servings of vegetables per day. What and how much people eat is influenced by their social and physical environments. Supermarkets are a key setting influencing food purchases, and as such, they can shape consumption patterns of F&Vs. Implementing effective strategies to increase F&V intake is crucial. The objective of this research was to test the feasibility of covertly modifying shopper purchasing behaviour to purchase more F&Vs using a visual divider nudge message (prompts) covering the entire base of shopping trolleys. Placards provided a visual representation of the recommended proportion of the trolley base that should be allocated to fruits and vegetables (implied social norm). Applying an intervention research design, 30 out of ~100 trolleys were fitted with the placards and shopper purchases were measured by collecting receipts to measure the weight (kg), total spending and F&V specific spending (Australian dollars) for intervention versus control trolleys for one weekend day only. We also conducted a short intercept survey that was administered independently from the research study day on non-trial shoppers. Shoppers who selected trolleys with the divider nudge placards (n = 102) purchased equal weight of F&Vs (Intervention: mean = 6.25 kg, SD = 5.60 kg, 95% CI = 5.14 kg, 7.35 kg, vs. Control: mean 6.03 kg, SD = 5.17 kg, 95% CI = 5.01 kg, 7.04 kg, p = 0.768) and spent equal amounts on F&Vs compared to shoppers in the control group (n = 102) (Intervention: mean = $41.46, SD = $36.68, 95% CI = $34.25, $48.66, vs. Control: mean $39.85, SD = $33.30, 95% CI = $33.34, $46.39, p = 0.744). There was no difference in the total spending between groups (Intervention: mean = $135.99, SD = $90.10, 95% CI = $118.29, $153.68, vs. Control: mean $155.68, SD = $96.46, 95% CI = $136.73, $174.63, p = 0.133). The divider nudge placard did not lead to any difference in shoppers' purchases of F&Vs. However, this study demonstrates the feasibility of testing a cheap, simple and easy supermarket nutrition intervention. Larger studies are required to elucidate and confirm these findings over the longer term.</p>","PeriodicalId":48536,"journal":{"name":"Nutrition Bulletin","volume":" ","pages":"513-522"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nutrition Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nbu.12642","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Fruit and vegetable (F&V) consumption is associated with a reduced risk of developing obesity and chronic diseases: however, only one in 16 Australian adults consume F&Vs at the recommended two servings of fruit and five servings of vegetables per day. What and how much people eat is influenced by their social and physical environments. Supermarkets are a key setting influencing food purchases, and as such, they can shape consumption patterns of F&Vs. Implementing effective strategies to increase F&V intake is crucial. The objective of this research was to test the feasibility of covertly modifying shopper purchasing behaviour to purchase more F&Vs using a visual divider nudge message (prompts) covering the entire base of shopping trolleys. Placards provided a visual representation of the recommended proportion of the trolley base that should be allocated to fruits and vegetables (implied social norm). Applying an intervention research design, 30 out of ~100 trolleys were fitted with the placards and shopper purchases were measured by collecting receipts to measure the weight (kg), total spending and F&V specific spending (Australian dollars) for intervention versus control trolleys for one weekend day only. We also conducted a short intercept survey that was administered independently from the research study day on non-trial shoppers. Shoppers who selected trolleys with the divider nudge placards (n = 102) purchased equal weight of F&Vs (Intervention: mean = 6.25 kg, SD = 5.60 kg, 95% CI = 5.14 kg, 7.35 kg, vs. Control: mean 6.03 kg, SD = 5.17 kg, 95% CI = 5.01 kg, 7.04 kg, p = 0.768) and spent equal amounts on F&Vs compared to shoppers in the control group (n = 102) (Intervention: mean = $41.46, SD = $36.68, 95% CI = $34.25, $48.66, vs. Control: mean $39.85, SD = $33.30, 95% CI = $33.34, $46.39, p = 0.744). There was no difference in the total spending between groups (Intervention: mean = $135.99, SD = $90.10, 95% CI = $118.29, $153.68, vs. Control: mean $155.68, SD = $96.46, 95% CI = $136.73, $174.63, p = 0.133). The divider nudge placard did not lead to any difference in shoppers' purchases of F&Vs. However, this study demonstrates the feasibility of testing a cheap, simple and easy supermarket nutrition intervention. Larger studies are required to elucidate and confirm these findings over the longer term.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在超市购物车中使用分隔器推动来增加水果和蔬菜的购买:使用干预设计的可行性研究。
食用水果和蔬菜可以降低患肥胖症和慢性病的风险:然而,只有1/16的澳大利亚成年人每天食用推荐的两份水果和五份蔬菜。人们吃什么和吃多少受他们的社会和物质环境的影响。超市是影响食品购买的关键环境,因此,它们可以塑造F&Vs的消费模式。实施有效的策略来增加F&V的摄入量至关重要。这项研究的目的是测试使用覆盖购物车整个底座的视觉分隔器推送信息(提示)秘密修改购物者购买行为以购买更多F&V的可行性。标牌提供了手推车底座的推荐比例的视觉表示,该比例应分配给水果和蔬菜(隐含的社会规范)。采用干预研究设计,约100辆手推车中有30辆安装了标语牌,通过收集收据来衡量购物者的购买量,以衡量干预手推车与对照手推车的重量(公斤)、总支出和F&V特定支出(澳元),仅限一个周末。我们还对非试验购物者进行了一项简短的截距调查,该调查独立于研究日进行。选择带有分隔器的手推车的购物者推着标语牌(n = 102)购买同等重量的F&V(干预:平均值 = 6.25 kg,SD = 5.60 kg,95%置信区间 = 5.14 千克,7.35 kg,对照组:平均6.03 kg,SD = 5.17 kg,95%置信区间 = 5.01 千克,7.04 kg,p = 0.768),并且与对照组的购物者相比在F&V上花费了相同的金额(n = 102)(干预:平均值 = $41.46,标准差 = $36.68.95%CI = $34.25,48.66美元,与对照组相比:平均39.85美元,SD = $33.30,95%CI = $33.34,46.39美元 = 0.744)。两组之间的总支出没有差异(干预:平均 = $135.99,标准差 = $90.10,95%置信区间 = $118.29,153.68美元,与对照组相比:平均155.68美元(SD) = $96.46,95%置信区间 = $136.73,174.63美元 = 0.133)。分隔器推压标语牌没有导致购物者购买F&Vs的任何差异。然而,这项研究证明了测试一种廉价、简单、容易的超市营养干预措施的可行性。需要进行更大规模的研究来阐明和证实这些长期的发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nutrition Bulletin
Nutrition Bulletin NUTRITION & DIETETICS-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
12.10%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: The Nutrition Bulletin provides accessible reviews at the cutting edge of research. Read by researchers and nutritionists working in universities and research institutes; public health nutritionists, dieticians and other health professionals; nutritionists, technologists and others in the food industry; those engaged in higher education including students; and journalists with an interest in nutrition.
期刊最新文献
Eggs and Associated Nutrients: Implications for Brain Development and Function From Conception to Early Adulthood: A Narrative Review. 'PULSE FICTION': Development of Slightly Processed Pulse-Based Foods and Recipes to Meet the Needs of Consumers and the Agricultural Sector and Improve Food Sustainability. The Relationship Between Climate Change Awareness, Sustainable Nutrition Behaviours and Acceptability of Alternative Protein Sources in Generation Z: A Cross-Sectional Study. Prevalence of the Double Burden of Malnutrition in Nepalese Students Aged 6-18 Years: An Urgent Call for Intervention. Self-Reported Attention to Positive Versus Negative Nutrients During Breakfast Cereal Selection Is Associated With Healthier Food Choice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1