Food PreferencesNCT05953246
Comparing Designs for Restaurant "Eco-Labels"
A study testing Neutral labels, Numeric text-only sustainability labels and Endorsement text-only sustainability labels in people with Food Preferences, run by Stanford University at 1 site in United States.
Trial 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… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Food Preferences
- What is being tested?
- Neutral labels, Numeric text-only sustainability labels and Endorsement text-only sustainability labels
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 2,207 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 7 Aug 2023to 7 Aug 2023
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Participants will be US adults
- Ages 18 or older
- With an over-sample of adults (50% of total sample) 18-29 years
Who cannot join
- Younger than 18
- Non-US
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Stanford School of Medicine
Palo Alto, California, 94304
About this study
Official title: Comparing Designs for Environmental Sustainability "Eco-Labels" for Restaurant Menus
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).
Read the 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).
- Conditions
- Food Preferences
- Being tested
- Neutral labels, Numeric text-only sustainability labels, Endorsement text-only sustainability labels, Endorsement icon-only sustainability labels, Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability labels
- Keywords
- food labeling, sustainability, diet, food choices
- Medical subject headings
- Food Preferences
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Neutral labelsBehavioural
Participants view neutral labels (QR codes with and without neutral text) for menu items
Numeric text-only sustainability labelsBehavioural
Participants view labels with numeric text depicting the greenhouse gas emissions associated with production of the menu item
Endorsement text-only sustainability labelsBehavioural
Participants view labels using text to endorse menu items as having low environmental impact
Endorsement icon-only sustainability labelsBehavioural
Participants view labels using icons to endorse menu items as having low environmental impact
Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability labelsBehavioural
Participants view labels using text and icons to endorse menu items as having low environmental impact
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Neutral labels | Active comparator | Labels shown will be QR codes with and without neutral text (i.e., not mentioning environmental impacts) Receives: Behavioral: Neutral labels |
| Numeric text-only sustainability labels | Experimental | Labels shown will contain numeric text depicting the greenhouse gas emissions associated with production of the menu item Receives: Behavioral: Numeric text-only sustainability labels |
| Endorsement text-only sustainability labels | Experimental | Labels shown will contain text endorsing menu items as having low environmental impact Receives: Behavioral: Endorsement text-only sustainability labels |
| Endorsement icon-only sustainability labels | Experimental | Labels shown will contain icons endorsing menu items as having low environmental impact Receives: Behavioral: Endorsement icon-only sustainability labels |
| Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability labels | Experimental | Labels shown will contain both text and icons endorsing menu items as having low environmental impact Receives: Behavioral: Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability labels |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Perceived message effectiveness
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.
Measured: The survey will take up to 20 minutes
Secondary outcomes (4)
Attention
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).
Measured: The survey will take up to 20 minutes
Thinking about environmental effects
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).
Measured: The survey will take up to 20 minutes
Anticipated social interactions
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).
Measured: The survey will take up to 20 minutes
Believability
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).
Measured: The survey will take up to 20 minutes
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Jul 2023
- Study start7 Aug 2023
- Primary completion7 Aug 2023
- Study completion7 Aug 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Food PreferencesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Stanford UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 2,207 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Stanford University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Harvard Pilgrim Health Care
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Anna Grummon, Stanford University
- Investigators
- Anna H Grummon, PhD, Principal investigator, Assistant Professor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05953246
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 69580b
- Status last verified
- Aug 2023
- First submitted
- 11 Jul 2023
- Last updated
- 16 Aug 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: In the consenting process, participants agreed that de-identified data produced from this project may be distributed for future research studies without additional informed consent. After analysis, we will upload the de-identified data to ResearchBox for public sharing.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 16 Aug 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparing Designs for Environmental Sustainability "Eco-Labels" for Restaurant Menus
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05953246
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 69580b
- Conditions
- Food Preferences
- Keywords
- food labeling, sustainability, diet, food choices
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 2,207 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Stanford UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Harvard Pilgrim Health Care
- Study start
- 7 Aug 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 7 Aug 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 7 Aug 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 20 Jul 2023 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
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 design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 5
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Neutral labels | Active comparator | Behavioral: Neutral labelsLabels shown will be QR codes with and without neutral text (i.e., not mentioning environmental impacts) |
| Numeric text-only sustainability labels | Experimental | Behavioral: Numeric text-only sustainability labelsLabels shown will contain numeric text depicting the greenhouse gas emissions associated with production of the menu item |
| Endorsement text-only sustainability labels | Experimental | Behavioral: Endorsement text-only sustainability labelsLabels shown will contain text endorsing menu items as having low environmental impact |
| Endorsement icon-only sustainability labels | Experimental | Behavioral: Endorsement icon-only sustainability labelsLabels shown will contain icons endorsing menu items as having low environmental impact |
| Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability labels | Experimental | Behavioral: Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability labelsLabels shown will contain both text and icons endorsing menu items as having low environmental impact |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Participants will be US adults
- Ages 18 or older
- With an over-sample of adults (50% of total sample) 18-29 years
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Younger than 18
- Non-US
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Neutral labelsParticipants view neutral labels (QR codes with and without neutral text) for menu items | Behavioural | Neutral labels |
| Numeric text-only sustainability labelsParticipants view labels with numeric text depicting the greenhouse gas emissions associated with production of the menu item | Behavioural | Numeric text-only sustainability labels |
| Endorsement text-only sustainability labelsParticipants view labels using text to endorse menu items as having low environmental impact | Behavioural | Endorsement text-only sustainability labels |
| Endorsement icon-only sustainability labelsParticipants view labels using icons to endorse menu items as having low environmental impact | Behavioural | Endorsement icon-only sustainability labels |
| Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability labelsParticipants view labels using text and icons to endorse menu items as having low environmental impact | Behavioural | Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability labels |
Primary outcome
Perceived message effectiveness
Time frame: 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.
4 secondary outcomes
Attention
Time frame: The survey will take up to 20 minutes
Thinking about environmental effects
Time frame: The survey will take up to 20 minutes
Anticipated social interactions
Time frame: The survey will take up to 20 minutes
Believability
Time frame: The survey will take up to 20 minutes
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 16 Aug 2023.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. In the consenting process, participants agreed that de-identified data produced from this project may be distributed for future research studies without additional informed consent. After analysis, we will upload the de-identified data to ResearchBox for public sharing.
Related trials for Food Preferences
Recruiting
Influence of Social Media Ads on Food Choice - Master Protocol
Food Selection, Food Choices
Recruiting
The Florida ASCENT Study
Cancer, Food Deprivation
Recruiting
Using Single and Combined Nudge Strategies to Promote Healthier Beverage Intake Among College Students
Obesity, Food Selection
Recruiting
Influence of "Likes" in Social Media Food Ads on Black and White Adolescents' Food Purchases - Study 2
Food Selection
RecruitingObservational study
Evolution of Food Oral Processing Behaviours, Food Bolus Formation and Texture Preferences Between 6 to 12 Years Old and Adult Age
Food Oral Processing, Texture Preference
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Anna H Grummon, PhD principal investigator
Assistant Professor
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Neutral labels, Numeric text-only sustainability labels and Endorsement text-only sustainability labels in people with Food Preferences, run by Stanford University at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 16 Aug 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Perceived message effectiveness (time frame: The survey will take up to 20 minutes). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 16 Aug 2023.