Trial reportBMC public health2018
Availability of healthier vs. less healthy food and food choice: an online experiment.
Trial report in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of increasing the relative availability of meat-free options on food selection: two natural field experiments and an online randomised trial.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2022Trial
- Impact of altering the available food options on selection: Potential mediation by social norms.Appetite · 2021Trial
- Impact of increasing the availability of healthier vs. less-healthy food on food selection: a randomised laboratory experiment.BMC public health · 2021Trial
- Trial
- Socioeconomic position and the impact of increasing availability of lower energy meals vs. menu energy labelling on food choice: two randomized controlled trials in a virtual fast-food restaurant.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2020Trial
- Beyond one-shot nudges: the effects of repeated interventions for healthier online meal ordering.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Scaling Up the Evidence: What Open Banking Brings to Gambling Research and Policy.Journal of gambling studies · 2025Article
- Evidence on the effectiveness and equity of population-based policies to reduce the burden of type 2 diabetes: a narrative review.Diabetologia · 2025Review
- Using evidence-based models of human behaviour to reduce endocrine-disrupting chemicals exposure: recommendations for strengthening interventions.Open research Europe · 2025Article
- The Effect of Unhealthy Food Packaging Information Boundaries on Consumer Purchasing Intentions.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Barriers and facilitators to healthy eating in disadvantaged adults living in the UK: a scoping review.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Article
- Tunneling, cognitive load and time orientation and their relations with dietary behavior of people experiencing financial scarcity - an AI-assisted scoping review elaborating on scarcity theory.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2024Article
- Association of the retail food environment, BMI, dietary patterns, and socioeconomic position in urban areas of Mexico.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Is altering the availability of healthier vs. less-healthy options effective across socioeconomic groups? A mega-analysis.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2022Article
- Explaining the effect on food selection of altering availability: two experimental studies on the role of relative preferences.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Rumination and Worry Selectively Modulate Total Calorie Consumption within an Online, Nudge Tactic Paradigm.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Beyond choice architecture: advancing the science of changing behaviour at scale.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Increasing availability of lower energy meals vs. energy labelling in virtual full-service restaurants: two randomized controlled trials in participants of higher and lower socioeconomic position.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Perseverative Cognition and Snack Choice: An Online Pilot Investigation.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOur environments shape our behaviour, but little research has addressed whether healthier cues have a similar impact to less healthy ones. This online study examined the impact on food choices of the number of (i) healthier and (ii) less healthy snack foods available, and possible moderation by cognitive load and socioeconomic status.
methodsUK adults (n = 1509) were randomly allocated to one of six groups (two cognitive load x three availability conditions). Participants memorised a 7-digit number (7777777: low cognitive load; 8529713: high cognitive load). While remembering this number, participants chose the food they would most like to eat from: (a) two healthier and two less healthy foods, (b) six healthier and two less healthy foods, or (c) two healthier and six less healthy foods.
resultsCompared to being offered two healthier and two less healthy options, the odds of choosing a healthier option were twice as high (Odds Ratio (OR): 2.0, 95%CI: 1.6, 2.6) with four additional healthier options, while the odds of choosing a less healthy option were four times higher (OR: 4.3, 95%CI: 3.1, 6.0) with four additional less healthy options. There were no significant main effects or interactions with cognitive load or socioeconomic status.
conclusionsThis study provides a novel test of the impact of healthier vs. less healthy food cues on food choice, suggesting that less healthy food cues have a larger effect than healthier ones. Consequently, removing less healthy as opposed to adding healthier food options could have greater impact on healthier choices. Studies are now needed in which choices are made between physically-present foods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.