Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24721289›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2014

The effects of food advertising and cognitive load on food choices.

Frederick J Zimmerman, Sandhya V Shimoga

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Frederick J ZimmermanDepartment of Health Policy & Management, Fielding School of Public Health, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA. fredzimmerman@ucla.edu.
Sandhya V Shimoga

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdvertising has been implicated in the declining quality of the American diet, but much of the research has been conducted with children rather than adults. This study tested the effects of televised food advertising on adult food choice.

methodsParticipants (N = 351) were randomized into one of 4 experimental conditions: exposure to food advertising vs. exposure to non-food advertising, and within each of these groups, exposure to a task that was either cognitively demanding or not cognitively demanding. The number of unhealthy snacks chosen was subsequently measured, along with total calories of the snacks chosen.

resultsThose exposed to food advertising chose 28% more unhealthy snacks than those exposed to non-food-advertising (95% CI: 7% - 53%), with a total caloric value that was 65 kcal higher (95% CI: 10-121). The effect of advertising was not significant among those assigned to the low-cognitive-load group, but was large and significant among those assigned to the high-cognitive-load group: 43% more unhealthy snacks (95% CI: 11% - 85%) and 94 more total calories (95% CI: 19-169).

conclusionsTelevised food advertising has strong effects on individual food choice, and these effects are magnified when individuals are cognitively occupied by other tasks.

Indexed as

AdvertisingChoice BehaviorCognitionFeeding BehaviorFoodAdolescentAdultEnergy IntakeFemaleFood PreferencesHumansMaleSnacksYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID24721289
PMCPMC4021209

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.