What determines real-world meal size? Evidence for pre-meal planning

Fay, Stephanie H.; Ferriday, Danielle; Hinton, Elanor C.; Shakeshaft, Nicholas G.; Rogers, Peter J.; Brunstrom, Jeffrey Michael

doi:10.1016/j.appet.2011.01.006

Cited by 105 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another obstacle to adopting SS guidance is the increasing concern about avoiding food wastage (26,63,66,101) . Lack of consideration for PS has also been attributed to hunger and satiety cues (26,73,101,114,132,143,(145)(146)(147)(148)(149)(150)(151) . Approximately a fifth of consumers eat what is on their plate until they feel full (73) .…”

Section: Consumer Understandingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the main reasons for failing to adhere to such guidance is consumer habit and experience (48,66,73,141) . The tradition of 'cleaning one's plate' (66,73,142) occurs at over 91 % of meals (143) with just over half of consumers admitting to this when eating out (73) . Consumers have been found to ignore SS guidance when eating outside of the home (66) , albeit they considered the home to be the most challenging setting in which to control their PS (63) .…”

Section: Consumer Understandingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Serving size guidance for consumers: is it effective?

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Larger portion sizes (PS) may be inciting over-eating and contributing to obesity rates. Currently, there is a paucity of data on the effectiveness of serving size (SS) guidance. The aims of the present review are to evaluate SS guidance; the understanding, usability and acceptability of such guidance, its impact on consumers and potential barriers to its uptake. A sample of worldwide SS guidance schemes (n 87) were identified using targeted and untargeted searches, overall these were found to communicate various inconsistent and often conflicting messages about PS selection. The available data suggest that consumers have difficulty in understanding terms such as ‘portion size’ and ‘serving size’, as these tend to be used interchangeably. In addition, discrepancies between recommended SS and those present on food labels add to the confusion. Consumers generally understand and visualise SS best when expressed in terms of household measures rather than actual weights. Only a limited number of studies have examined the direct impact of SS guidance on consumer behaviour with equivocal results. Although consumers recognise that guidance on selecting SS would be helpful, they are often unwilling to act on such guidance. The challenge of achieving consumer adherence to SS guidance is formidable due to several barriers including chronic exposure to larger PS, distorted consumption norms and perceptions, the habit of ‘cleaning one's plate’ and language barriers for ethnic minorities. In conclusion, the impact of SS guidance on consumers merits further investigation to ensure that future guidance resonates with consumers by being more understandable, usable and acceptable.

show abstract

Section: Consumer Understandingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Consumer Understandingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Serving size guidance for consumers: is it effective?

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Secondly, it is likely that consumers' own and perceptions of others' evaluations of, for example, appropriate consumption amounts are likely to moderate the effectiveness of informational cues (Versluis et al 2015; see also Fay et al 2011). Research shows, for example, that exposure to a message emphasizing the healthy eating habits of other students increased consumption of fruit and vegetables, relative to exposure to a message communicating the health benefits of fruit and vegetable consumption (Robinson, Fleming, and Higgs 2014).…”

Section: Adding Informational Cues To the Situationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Right Here, Right Now: Situated Interventions to Change Consumer Habits

Best¹,

Papies²

2017

Journal of the Association for Consumer Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Consumer behavior-change interventions have traditionally encouraged consumers to form conscious intentions but, in the past decade, it has been shown that whilst these interventions have a medium-to-large effect in changing intentions, they have a much smaller effect in changing behavior. Consumers often do not act in accordance with their conscious intentions because situational cues in the immediate environment automatically elicit learned, habitual behaviors. It has therefore been suggested that researchers re-focus their efforts on developing interventions that target unconscious, unintentional influences on behavior, such as cuebehavior ('habit') associations. To develop effective consumer behavior-change interventions, however, we argue that it is first important to understand how consumer experiences are represented in memory, in order to successfully target the situational cues that most strongly predict engagement in habitual behavior. In this article, we present a situated cognition perspective of habits, and discuss how the situated cognition perspective extends our understanding of how consumer experiences are represented in memory, and the processes through which these situational representations can be retrieved in order to elicit habitual consumer behaviors. Based on the principles of situated cognition, we then discuss five ways interventions could change consumer habits by targeting situational cues in the consumer environment, and suggest how existing interventions utilizing these behaviorchange strategies could be improved by integrating the principles of the situated cognition approach.

show abstract

“…Food and drink portion sizes affect how much is consumed (15) (16) and there is a cumulative effect when larger portions are served repeatedly (17).This occurs because there is no precise energy balancing by the body (18), coupled in part with a tendency to eat all or almost all of the food on our plate (19). There is ample evidence that portion sizes of many foods, including packaged foods, and foods served in the home and in the out-of-home sector (OOH), have increased since at least the 1990s (20).…”

Section: Portion Size Reductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What can the food and drink industry do to help achieve the 5% free sugars goal?

Gibson¹,

Ashwell

Arthur

et al. 2017

Perspect Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/pure/about/ebr-terms 1 What can the food and drink industry do to help achieve the 5% free sugars goal? AcknowledgementsThis work was funded by an unconditional grant from Sugar Nutrition UK. We followed guidelines for scientific integrity that ensured the funders had no role in the workshop or preparation of documents and no sight of the article until after submission. DisclosuresSigrid Gibson has received research grants and consulting fees from Sugar Nutrition UK, the International Sweeteners Association and food and beverage companies. Margaret Ashwell has received consulting fees from the Global Stevia Institute and food and beverage companies. Jenny Arthur is director of nutrition and innovation at Leatherhead Food Research which provides expertise and support to the global food and beverage sector. Lindsey Bagley has received consulting fees for product development from food and ingredient manufacturers. Alison Lennox (Stephen) has been on scientific advisory groups for Nestle and the British Nutrition Foundation. Peter Rogers has received grant support from Sugar Nutrition UK for research on the effects of sugar on human appetite, payments for consultancy services from Coca Cola Great Britain, and speaker's fees from the International Sweeteners Association. Sara Stanner is Science Director at the British Nutrition Foundation which receives some income through membership and donations from the food industry. Ethical approval was not required because this was not a research study. Abstract AimsTo contribute evidence and make recommendations to assist in achieving free sugars reduction, with due consideration to the broader picture of weight management and dietary quality. MethodsAn expert workshop in July 2016 addressed options outlined in the Public Health England report "Sugar Reduction: The evidence for action" that related directly to the food industry. Panel members contributed expertise in food technology, public heath nutrition, marketing, communications, psychology and behaviour. Recommendations were directed towards reformulation, reduced portion sizes, labelling and consumer education. These were evaluated based on their feasibility, likely consumer acceptability, efficacy and cost. ResultsThe panel agreed that the 5% target for energy from free sugars is unlikely to be achievable by the UK population in the near future, but a gradual reduction from average current level of intake is feasible. Progress requires collaborations between government, food industry, non-government organisations, health professionals, educators and consumers. Reformulation should start with the main contributors of free sugars in the diet, prioritizing those products high in free sugars and relatively low in micronutrients. There is most potential for replacing free sugars in beverages using high potency sweetene...

show abstract

What determines real-world meal size? Evidence for pre-meal planning

Cited by 105 publications

References 42 publications

Serving size guidance for consumers: is it effective?

Serving size guidance for consumers: is it effective?

Right Here, Right Now: Situated Interventions to Change Consumer Habits

What can the food and drink industry do to help achieve the 5% free sugars goal?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About