ArticleBMC public health2022
Explaining the effect on food selection of altering availability: two experimental studies on the role of relative preferences.
Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effect of increasing availability of vegetarian meals on their sales in worksite cafeterias: a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2026Trial
- Impact on alcohol selection and online purchasing of changing the proportion of available non-alcoholic versus alcoholic drinks: A randomised controlled trial.PLoS medicine · 2023Trial
- Impact of altering the available food options on selection: Potential mediation by social norms.Appetite · 2021Trial
- Are meat options preferred to comparable vegetarian options? An experimental study.BMC research notes · 2021Trial
- Evaluating select factors and mechanisms influencing meat consumption in Baltimore City: an agent-based modeling study.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Review
- Evidence on the effectiveness and equity of population-based policies to reduce the burden of type 2 diabetes: a narrative review.Diabetologia · 2025Review
- Effects of increasing the availability of vegetarian options on main meal choices, meal offer satisfaction and liking: a pre-post analysis in a French university cafeteria.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2024Article
- Impact on sales of adding a smaller serving size of beer and cider in licensed premises: an A-B-A reversal design.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Article
- 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
- Beyond choice architecture: advancing the science of changing behaviour at scale.BMC public health · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIncreasing 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.
methodsUK 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.
resultsWhen 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%).
conclusionsThese 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 registrationISRCTN ( http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN27598623 ; 3/12/19 [Study 1]; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN61010183 ; 20/4/20 [Study 2]).
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.