Trial reportPloS one2025
Developing ecolabels to encourage sustainable eating in restaurants: A randomized experiment.
Trial report in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Restaurants are increasingly adopting ecolabels to highlight environmentally friendly menu offerings. However, it remains unclear which ecolabel design is the most effective at encouraging consumers to select these items. This study aimed to determine which of 4 common ecolabel formats are perceived as most effective at encouraging selection of environmentally sustainable foods. We conducted an online experiment with 2,169 US adults in August 2023. Participants were randomized to 1 of 5 label formats, including a control format (e.g., QR code) and 4 ecolabel formats: text-plus-icon, text-only, icon-only, or numeric ecolabels. Participants viewed 3 label variations of their randomly assigned label format. Participants rated each label variation on perceived effectiveness for encouraging environmentally sustainable food choices (primary outcome) and other label reactions (e.g., thinking about environmental impacts; secondary outcomes) on 5-point scales. All ecolabels were perceived as more effective at encouraging environmentally sustainable food choices than the control labels (range of average differential effects [ADEs]=.26 to .82, ps < .001). Among ecolabels, the text-plus-icon ecolabels were perceived as the most effective (mean = 3.17), followed by icon-only (mean = 2.95), text-only (mean = 2.93), and numeric (mean = 2.62) ecolabels. A relatively similar pattern emerged for secondary outcomes. Text-plus-icon ecolabels may be the most promising ecolabel format to encourage selection of sustainable foods. Restaurants, third-party certification systems, and policymakers interested in encouraging sustainable food choices in restaurants could consider adopting text-plus-icon ecolabels on restaurant menus, though further testing is needed to determine effects on behavior.
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.