Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36145107›Full record

ArticleNutrients2022

Sensory Appeal and Routines Beat Health Messages and Visibility Enhancements: Mixed-Methods Analysis of a Choice-Architecture Intervention in a Workplace Cafeteria.

Eeva Rantala, Elina Järvelä-Reijonen, Kati Pettersson, Janne Laine, Paula Vartiainen, Johanna Närväinen, Jussi Pihlajamäki, Kaisa Poutanen, Pilvikki Absetz, Leila Karhunen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nutrients, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

10 authors.

Eeva RantalaVTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, 02044 Espoo, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-8512-6638
Elina Järvelä-ReijonenInstitute of Public Health and Clinical Nutrition, University of Eastern Finland, 70211 Kuopio, Finland.
Kati PetterssonVTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, 02044 Espoo, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-3976-0042
Janne LaineVTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, 02044 Espoo, Finland.
Paula VartiainenInstitute of Public Health and Clinical Nutrition, University of Eastern Finland, 70211 Kuopio, Finland.
Johanna NärväinenVTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, 02044 Espoo, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-0397-6311
Jussi PihlajamäkiInstitute of Public Health and Clinical Nutrition, University of Eastern Finland, 70211 Kuopio, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-6241-6859
Kaisa PoutanenVTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, 02044 Espoo, Finland.
Pilvikki AbsetzFaculty of Social Sciences, Tampere University, 33520 Tampere, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-1047-909X
Leila KarhunenInstitute of Public Health and Clinical Nutrition, University of Eastern Finland, 70211 Kuopio, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-5801-8041

Funding

Finnish Food Research Foundation not applicableJuho Vainio Foundation 202100138Strategic Research Council of the Academy of Finland 303537Yrjö Jahnsson Foundation 20207314
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Easier recognition and enhanced visibility of healthy options supposedly increase healthy choices, but real-world evidence remains scarce. Addressing this knowledge gap, we promoted nutritionally favourable foods in a workplace cafeteria with three choice-architectural strategies-priming posters, point-of-choice nutrition labels, and improved product placement-and assessed their effects on visual attention, food choices, and food consumption. Additionally, we developed a method for analysing real-world eye-tracking data. The study followed a pretest-posttest design whereby control and intervention condition lasted five days each. We monitored visual attention (i.e., total number and duration of fixations) and food choices with eye tracking, interviewed customers about perceived influences on food choices, and measured cafeteria-level food consumption (g). Individual-level data represents 22 control and 19 intervention participants recruited at the cafeteria entrance. Cafeteria-level data represents food consumption during the trial (556/589 meals sold). Results indicated that the posters and labels captured participants' visual attention (~13% of fixations on defined areas of interest before food choices), but the intervention had insignificant effects on visual attention to foods, on food choices, and on food consumption. Interviews revealed 17 perceived influences on food choices, the most common being sensory appeal, healthiness, and familiarity. To conclude, the intervention appeared capable of attracting visual attention, yet ineffective in increasing healthier eating. The developed method enabled a rigorous analysis of visual attention and food choices in a natural choice setting. We discuss ways to boost the impact of the intervention on behaviour, considering target groups' motives. The work contributes with a unique, mixed-methods approach and a real-world setting that enabled a multi-dimensional effects evaluation with high external validity.

Indexed as

Food ServicesChoice BehaviorFood PreferencesHumansMealsWorkplacechoice architectureeye trackingfood choicehealth promotionmixed methodsnutritionworkplace cafeteria

Identifiers

PMID36145107
PMCPMC9505513

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.