Comparing Designs for Restaurant "Eco-Labels"

Not Applicable

Completed

• Conditions: Food Preferences

• Registration Number: NCT05953246
• Lead Sponsor: Stanford University

Brief Summary

The aim of this study is to compare responses to 5 different types of labels for restaurant menus: 1) Control (non-sustainability-label: neutral labels not referencing environmental sustainability); 2) Numeric text-only sustainability label; 3) Endorsement text-only sustainability label; 4) Endorsement icon-only sustainability label; 5) Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability label. Participants will be randomized to 1 of the 5 labeling arms above. Each participant will view 3 labels (shown in random order) from their randomly assigned labeling arm and respond to survey questions about each label (e.g., attention, perceived effectiveness).

Detailed Description

This is an online randomized controlled trial. Investigators will recruit participants through a survey company to complete an online survey. In the study, participants will be randomized to 1 of 5 labeling arms: 1) Control (non-sustainability-label: neutral labels not referencing environmental sustainability); 2) Numeric text-only sustainability label; 3) Endorsement text-only sustainability label; 4) Endorsement icon-only sustainability label; 5) Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability label. Participants will be randomized to 1 of the 5 labeling arms above. Each participant will view 3 labels (shown in random order) from their randomly assigned labeling arm and respond to survey questions about each label (e.g., attention, perceived effectiveness).

Study Timeline

• Study First Submitted: 2023-07-11
• Study First Submitted QC: 2023-07-11
• Study First Posted: 2023-07-20
• Status Verified: 2023-08
• Study Start: 2023-08-07
• Primary Completion: 2023-08-07
• Study Completion: 2023-08-07
• Last Update Submitted: 2023-08-15
• Last Update Posted: 2023-08-16

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: COMPLETED
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 2207

Inclusion Criteria

• Participants will be US adults
• Ages 18 or older
• With an over-sample of adults (50% of total sample) 18-29 years

Exclusion Criteria

• Younger than 18
• Non-US

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Perceived message effectiveness	The survey will take up to 20 minutes	Participants will rate the extent to which the label makes them want to choose items with the label on a 5-point scale ranging from low (1) to high (5). They will also rate the extent to which the label makes eating items with the label seem appealing to them on a 5-point scale ranging from low (1) to high (5). These items are adapted from the 3-item UNC Perceived Message Effectiveness scale. Investigators will average responses to these two items to create a perceived message effectiveness score, which will also range from low (1) to high (5). Higher scores therefore indicate higher perceived message effectiveness.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Anticipated social interactions	The survey will take up to 20 minutes	Participants will rate how likely they are to talk about the label with others in the next week on a 5-point response scale ranging from low (1) to high (5). Higher scores indicate labels elicit more anticipated social interactions (a better outcome).
Attention	The survey will take up to 20 minutes	Participants will rate the extent to which the label captures their attention on a 5-point response scale ranging from low (1) to high (5). Higher scores indicate more attention-grabbing labels (a better outcome).
Thinking about environmental effects	The survey will take up to 20 minutes	Participants will rate the extent to which the label makes them think about the environmental impacts of their food choices on a 5-point response scale ranging from low (1) to high (5). Higher scores indicate labels elicit more thinking about environmental effects (a better outcome).
Believability	The survey will take up to 20 minutes	Participants will rate how believable the label is on a 5-point response scale ranging from low (1) to high (5). Higher scores indicate labels are more believable (a better outcome).

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Stanford School of Medicine; 🇺🇸 Palo Alto, California, United States