Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40241017›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2025

Effect of a portion-size default nudge on meat consumption and diner satisfaction: controlled experiments in Stanford University dining halls.

A Voşki, M Braginsky, A Zhang, J Bertoldo, S Egan, L A Levig, M Mueller Ihrig, M B Mathur

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
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

8 authors.

A VoşkiEmmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources (E-IPER), Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability, Stanford University, 473 Via Ortega, Y2E2 Building, Suite 227, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA. avoski@stanford.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0740-6674
M BraginskyDepartment of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9039-3220
A ZhangQuantitative Sciences Unit, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, USA.
J BertoldoStanford Dining, Hospitality and Auxiliaries, Residential and Dining Enterprises, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9049-378X
S EganStanford Dining, Hospitality and Auxiliaries, Residential and Dining Enterprises, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
L A LevigStanford Dining, Hospitality and Auxiliaries, Residential and Dining Enterprises, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
M Mueller IhrigStanford Dining, Hospitality and Auxiliaries, Residential and Dining Enterprises, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
M B MathurQuantitative Sciences Unit, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6698-2607

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reducing meat consumption, especially in high-intake countries such as the United States, is crucial in mitigating the climate and biodiversity crises and improving public health and animal welfare. Choice-architecture interventions or nudges in the food domain, such as choice defaults (e.g., reduced default portion sizes), can be powerful levers of behavior change. However, evidence remains limited in large-scale, real-life settings, and little is known about potential effects on diner satisfaction and backfiring effects that reduce or even reverse the desired behavior. These uncertainties have posed substantial barriers to scalability and wider adoption by the food service industry. In our single-blinded, quasi-experimental, pre-registered field interventions in Stanford University dining halls with staff-served portions, a 25% reduction in the serving spoon size (Study 1, 24 days, 364 diners, made-to-order burritos) produced a non-significant trend of 18% less meat served per day without reducing overall diner satisfaction (p = 0.059, d = 0.64) but with a wide CI that included the null (- 49.2, 1.07). A more substantial 50% reduction in serving spoon size (Study 2, 29 days, 1802 diners, varying menu items) did not reduce the amount of meat served (p = 0.60, d = 0.20), triggered backfiring effects, and significantly decreased diner satisfaction. Combining the two studies, the intervention did not significantly reduce meat consumption. While the trends in our findings are consistent with the 'norm range model'-i.e., that moderate portion reductions may decrease intake but drastic reductions may prompt compensatory eating-key differences and contextual nuances between the two studies help explain the mixed results. Future studies on the 'norm range' of default portion size nudges to reduce meat consumption across different menu items and food service models is suggested to increase our understanding of effective and scalable interventions that facilitate collective shifts towards more sustainable dietary behaviors.

Indexed as

Consumer BehaviorFeeding BehaviorFood ServicesMeatPersonal SatisfactionPortion SizeAdultChoice BehaviorFemaleHumansMaleSingle-Blind MethodUniversitiesYoung AdultBehavior interventionDefault nudge Choice-architectureMeat consumptionPortion size

Identifiers

PMID40241017
PMCPMC12001533

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.