Impact of price elasticity on the healthfulness of food choices by gender

Abstract

Objective: To extend findings from experimental price elasticity studies by examining these effects in a field setting and identifying gender differences in purchasing behaviour in response to variations in the cost of lower energy-dense (ED) and higher ED foods. Setting: Data were collected from low- and median-income male and female grocery shoppers at a supermarket in the Western New York region. Design: Using a procedure adapted from experimental economics, participants were given a debit card in a grocery store setting and allowed to purchase any foods from two pricing conditions. Conditions were identical, except one had lower ED foods low priced, and the other had lower ED foods higher priced. The design was fully counterbalanced. Results: Overall, when lower ED foods were more expensive, fewer lower ED foods were purchased (95% confidence interval [CI]: −1.0, −.40). Gender differences revealed that men spent more money (in dollars) when higher ED foods were higher priced (95% CI: US$0.51, US$1.73) and women spent more money when lower ED foods were higher priced (95% CI: − US$2.21, − US$0.11). Furthermore, women, but not men, increased spending when lower ED foods were higher priced (95% CI: − US$2.85, − US$0.73). Conclusion: Higher costs for fruits and vegetables among consumers can adversely affect the purchase volume of these foods, with men being most susceptible to pricing manipulations. Results contribute to an understanding of how perceptions of price impact consumer choice and suggest that efforts aimed to increase the perceived value of health over cost should be tailored towards men.

Improving Consumption and Purchases of Healthier Foods in Retail Environments: A Systematic Review

“…Promotion was the most commonly utilized marketing P and was the focus of 23 studies. Overall, 1 study had mixed effects (positive + negative) [ 16 ], 5 had mixed effects (positive + null) [ 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ], 8 had mixed effects (positive + null + negative) [ 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 ], 1 had negative effects [ 30 ], 2 had null effects [ 31 , 32 ], and 13 had positive effects [ 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 ], (see Table 2 ).…”

“…Three studies implemented price-only interventions [ 18 , 29 , 33 ]. One study had mixed effects (positive + null + negative) [ 29 ], while another had mixed effects (positive + null) [ 18 ] and one study had only positive effects [ 33 ].…”

“…Three studies implemented price-only interventions [ 18 , 29 , 33 ]. One study had mixed effects (positive + null + negative) [ 29 ], while another had mixed effects (positive + null) [ 18 ] and one study had only positive effects [ 33 ]. Both experimental studies provided a 50% discount for fruits and vegetables [ 18 , 33 ] and found that customers who received the discount purchased significantly more fruits and vegetables than customers who did not receive the discount [ 18 , 33 ].…”

“…However, one study also found no sustained effect on participants’ spending on fruits and vegetables from baseline to follow-up period [ 18 ]. In addition, one study used a pre-experimental design [ 29 ].…”

Drivers of food choices among households in Kersa District, Eastern Ethiopia

“…A study in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia showed that consumption of ultra-processed foods increases with income and decreases with increasing price (39). Higher costs can adversely affect the purchase volume of foods (44)(45)(46) and some studies have shown that price changes had more effect on food choices than health and/or environment logos and labels (47,48).…”