Food Habits, Consumer Behavior
Conditions
Brief summary
The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of environmental modifications (choice architecture and a marketing campaign) in combination with weekly text messages on purchases of foods made by parents shopping in a large supermarket.
Detailed description
The Make It Fresh, For Less Supermarket Pilot Study is a supermarket-based intervention developed by the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in collaboration with the nonprofit organization ChopChop Magazine (chopchopmagazine.org) and a large Northeastern supermarket chain. A promotional campaign advertising low-cost, kid-friendly meals was piloted in one store selected by the supermarket partner, with promotions rotating every 4 weeks during a 16-week intervention period. Parent shoppers were recruited (n=401) at the store and given a study loyalty card to track their transactions. At the start of the intervention, half of the participants were additionally randomized to receive weekly behavioral messages via text message or email. Supermarket purchases were assessed at baseline, during the 16-week intervention, and up to 6-weeks post-intervention. Primary Aim 1: to examine the impact of a choice architecture intervention in combination with a promotional campaign on food purchases of parents shopping in a large supermarket. It is hypothesized that there will be an increase in selection of foods targeted by the promotional campaign when physical modifications are made. Primary Aim 2: to examine the impact of weekly behavioral messages in combination with an environmental change intervention on food purchases of parents shopping in a large supermarket. It is hypothesized that there will be a greater increase in selection of foods targeted by the promotional campaign among participants receiving the messages compared to participants exposed to the environmental change intervention alone.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALenvironmental change
1. Offer kid-friendly, low-cost recipes in a prominent, high-traffic location. 2. Offer healthy default ingredients (bundled ingredients promoted with recipes). 3. Promote recipe ingredients with prominently displayed signage and images. 4. Promote recipes in multiple locations throughout the store.
BEHAVIORALmessaging
Short, behavioral messages sent to participants via text message or email each week to promote the in-store environmental changes
Sponsors
Duke University
University of New England
Massachusetts General Hospital
Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH)
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* 18 years of age or older * English-speaking * Live with a child 18 years of age or younger * Do more than 50% of shopping at the study store * Primary shopper in the household
Exclusion criteria
* None
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in weekly purchases of recipe components (Selection of items bundled with each recipe) during four, 4-week promotional campaigns | Baseline, during intervention (4 weeks each) and up to 6 weeks post-intervention | Purchase of recipe ingredients |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Differential change in weekly purchases of recipe components by SNAP-eligibility | Baseline, during intervention (4 weeks each) and up to 6 weeks post-intervention | Stratification by SNAP-eligibility, recipe components |
| Differential change in weekly purchases of other food groups (substitution) by SNAP-eligibility | Baseline, during intervention (4 weeks each) and up to 6 weeks post-intervention | Stratification by SNAP-eligibility, other food groups |
| Acceptability of intervention (self-reported survey measures) | Up to 6 weeks post-intervention | Shopper responses to survey questions asking participants to rate the acceptability of each recipe (taste, cost, difficulty, perceptions of children's preferences) on a Likert scale from 1-5. |
| Change in weekly purchases of other food categories (substitution of recipe ingredients for other foods) | Baseline, during intervention (4 weeks each) and up to 6 weeks post-intervention | Substitution of recipe ingredients for other foods |
| Adoption of intervention (self-reported survey measures) | Up to 6 weeks post-intervention | Shopper responses to survey questions asking whether the shopper made each recipe in the display. |
| Reach of intervention (direct observation measures) | During intervention (4 weeks each) | Observation of shopper interactions with promotional campaign (count of number of shoppers who passed the display, looked at the display, and took an item from the display). |
| Fidelity to intended intervention (direct observation measures) | During intervention (4 weeks each) | Monthly random site visits to assess presence or absence of each element of the display (placards, poster, recipe cards, intended ingredients, store banners). |
| Recall of intervention (self-reported survey measures) | Up to 6 weeks post-intervention | Shopper responses to survey questions regarding aided and unaided recall. Unaided recall asks shoppers to choose the best description of what they saw in the store and aided recall asks shoppers whether they remember seeing various elements of the display in the store (yes, no, not sure). These measures will be combined to report the proportion of shoppers who recalled each component of the intervention either through aided or unaided means. |
Outcome results
None listed