Menu labelling and food choice in obese adults: a feasibility study

Abstract

BackgroundTo date research examining the benefits of menu labelling in the UK is sparse. The aim of the present study was to examine the impact of menu labelling in a UK obese population.MethodsUsing a repeated measures design, 61 patients at a tier 3 weight management service completed four questionnaires to assess their food choice (control) and behaviour change when presented with 3 menu labelling formats (calorie content; nutrient content; and energy expenditure).ResultsAll three forms of labelling increased participants weight control concerns compared to the control condition. There was a significant difference in content of food ordered in the three menu labelling formats compared to the control condition. The calorie condition had the largest percentage decrease in calories selected followed by energy expenditure and nutrient content. However, no difference was observed between the three conditions in the desire for menu labelling in restaurants to be introduced in the UK.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that menu labelling should be enforced in the UK as it is both beneficial to promoting healthy eating and in demand. This study is the first to examine menu labelling in a UK obese population using energy expenditure equivalents to provide nutritional information.

A Systematic Review of Calorie Labeling and Modified Calorie Labeling Interventions: Impact on Consumer and Restaurant Behavior

“…A total of 21 studies were conducted in simulation or laboratory settings (Table ). Of the ten laboratory studies, five measured hypothetical food selections and five measured actual food selections and consumption . Eleven simulation studies measured hypothetical food selections .…”

“…Reale and Flint recruited 61 people with obesity from a weight management service and conducted a randomized crossover trial in which participants were asked to place a hypothetical order from one of the following four menu conditions: (1) no label, (2) calorie label, (3) information on fat, protein, carbohydrates, salt, and fiber, or (4) energy expenditure label. Participants were exposed to each menu condition on a separate day, starting with the no label condition on the first day.…”

“…Fewer studies have examined modified calorie information (e.g., daily recommended intake statement) relative to calorie labels, and these results are highly variable across settings (22,23,31,33,35,43,49,(51)(52)(53)(55)(56)(57)(58)(59)(60)(61)(62)(63)(64)(65)(66)(67)70). Presumably, making calorie information easier to understand and more accessible to a greater range of individuals, particularly those with lower numeracy levels, would increase the reach and impact of such information, but real-world RCTs are needed to know for sure.…”

The Impact of Menu Label Design on Visual Attention, Food Choice and Recognition: An Eye Tracking Study

“…Consumers have been found to exhibit a bias toward items within a certain location on a menu, also known as the sweet spot. This generally tends to be in the centre of the display which increases the likelihood of that item being selected by 60% (Reutskaja et al 2011). The label design therefore may have been competing for visual attention against a predominant location that the participants were observing.…”

“…Evidence suggests that processing of attended information occurs "as soon as possible" (Just and Carpenter 1980) and acts as a determining factor to elaborate a decision. Therefore, if the attended information is relevant for the intentional decision to be made, then the likelihood of choosing that particular food item increases (Reutskaja et al 2011;Bialkova and van Trijp 2011). These food items are known as trigger foods which once exposed to, can set the tone for the entire meal such that exposure to a low calorie appetiser is eight times more likely to encourage low calorie consumption for the rest of the meal (Hanks et al 2012;Wansink and Love 2014).…”