When are “Dish of the Day” nudges most effective to increase vegetable selection?
Introduction
Almost 1.8 million deaths were estimated to be specifically attributable to insufficient vegetable consumption worldwide in 2010 (Lim et al., 2012). In more than half of all European countries, including France, the intake of fruits and vegetables is well under the WHO-issued recommendation of 400 g of fruits and vegetables per day (Dubuisson et al., 2010), prompting public health action to promote increased consumption. While this generally targets fruits and vegetables as a single food group, vegetables often account for fewer than 50% of intake within the category. Yet, vegetables present specific health benefits, distinct sensory properties and consumption characteristics, suggesting a need for more targeted actions (Appleton et al., 2016, Glasson et al., 2011). Over the years, out-of-home eating has gained a prominent role in Europe, accounting, for example, for 15 to 20% of meals in France (Orfanos et al., 2007).
Therefore, the foodservice sector has become a necessary player in this public health issue (Lachat et al., 2008) and is increasingly considered as such in the public policy debate surrounding healthy eating environments. In Europe, public intervention in this domain has focused primarily on the food offer itself, in particular in institutional foodservice, with, for instance, the introduction of mandatory standards for offer in school canteens in several countries (Saulais, 2015). Another approach, in commercial foodservice especially, is to target consumers behaviours at the point of decision (the restaurant), and design interventions that promote both the selection and increased consumption of healthier dishes, and particularly of vegetables. The majority of these point-of-choice interventions in foodservice have focused on providing nutritional information to consumers through product labelling (calorie labelling, traffic light labelling, or healthy food labels). Notably, in the United States, restaurant chains have, since 2018, been required to provide calorie information on menus by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). However, such strategies seem to have unclear, and sometimes even adverse outcomes on consumers’ behaviours (Bleich et al., 2017, Cohen and Babey, 2012).
In parallel, there is increasing evidence that food choices rely on minimized cognitive efforts (Adamowicz and Swait, 2013) achieved through the use of simple heuristics (Scheibehenne et al., 2007). Heuristics are “rules of thumb” which reduce the cognitive effort necessary to make a decision by relying on cues from the choice environment. According to this framework, the choice architecture, that is to say the way choice tasks are framed in the environment, can have an impact on the outcome decisions (Kahneman, 2003, Tversky and Kahneman, 1981). In the case of food choices, factors such as the order and presentation of menu items (Dayan and Bar-Hillel, 2011), the variety of food categories to choose from (Bucher et al., 2013, Bucher et al., 2011), and the convenience of access to the food items at a buffet (Rozin et al., 2011) have all been found to affect consumers’ decisions at the point of choice. A behavioural change approach, referred to as “nudging” (Thaler and Sunstein, 2008), is derived from this view. Contrary to information-based interventions, nudges target the way choices are framed, with the purpose of guiding decision-makers in a specific direction, while leaving the possibility of easily opting out if desired. This framework has recently gained considerable interest for the promotion of healthier or more sustainable food choices (Loewenstein et al., 2012), inspiring a large number of field studies over the past few years. In foodservice environments specifically, there is some evidence that healthier food choices can be achieved through salience (increasing attention to the option, for instance through descriptive or personally-relevant information) and priming (providing subconscious cues, for instance by changing visibility of healthy options or by altering the position of healthier items through changing order or distance to the consumer) (Bucher et al., 2016, Ozturk et al., 2016, Wilson et al., 2016).
‘Nudging’ restaurant customers at the point of choice therefore appears as an operationally viable avenue for foodservice stakeholders. Changes in menu design have been considered especially relevant. In 2010, the EU-funded HECTOR project conducted a SWOT analysis of the foodservice sector, which resulted in the identification of five strategies to foster healthier behaviours. One of these strategies was “to better market healthy options in and out of the catering environment, i.e. use the ‘Chef’s Recommendation’ to promote healthier choices” ((Lachat et al., 2010), p.198). Although not explicitly named a nudge by the authors, this strategy corresponds to a choice architecture intervention, in the sense that it is based on the way the options are presented to consumers. Indeed, identifying a dish as “Dish of the day” (DoD) alters the framing of the dish options within the choice environment, which in turn impacts on the search process.
Scientific evidence regarding point-of-choice nudge interventions in foodservice contexts remains limited in geographical scope and in precision, especially in commercial foodservice (Filimonau et al., 2017). Several authors have called for more research grounded in decision-making theory to identify the conditions of successful deployment of a ‘nudging’ strategy (Kirman, 2016, Szaszi et al., 2018). Several steps are needed to achieve such a goal. One is the replication of choice architecture interventions in other settings to strengthen existing evidence. Another crucial question is how the type and the number of alternatives in a nudged choice set may impact the way the nudge impacts consumers’ decisions (Marchiori et al., 2017). Lastly, a more practical challenge is the assessment of the consequences of choice architecture actions on consumer behaviour (Marchiori et al., 2017): if changes in the choice architecture nudge consumers in a direction that they later regret, this might compromise the persistence of the effect in the longer term, and impact the motivation of foodservice professionals to implement such actions if they have adverse effects on consumer satisfaction – a concern that the foodservice sector itself expressed regarding the implementation of DoD interventions (Lachat et al., 2010).
This article presents the results of an experiment designed to study the effect of a DoD nudge aiming to increase the probability that a consumer chooses a vegetable-based dish in a self-service restaurant setting. More precisely, the primary objective is to replicate the DoD effect in this particular setting, and to investigate how two key characteristics of the choice set, (i) the type and popularity of dishes offered and (ii) the number of alternatives to choose from, impact the effectiveness of this nudge. A secondary objective is to consider the consequences of nudging consumers towards healthier dishes in terms of food intake, food waste, and overall satisfaction.
Section snippets
What is a “Dish of the day” intervention?
In a survey conducted in 2016 on a sample of 461 French employees eating their lunch in restaurants on workdays, 38.2% of respondents stated that “Dish of the day” or “Specialty of the house” was one of the criteria that could affect their decision-making on what to choose1. Foodservice operators have themselves highlighted that they can promote healthier
Experimental approach
In order to test these hypotheses, a living lab experiment was set up. Living laboratories, or living labs, are platforms of research and innovation where users are studied in their natural environment (Niitamo et al., 2006). In the present case, the living lab is an experimental restaurant, and users are food consumers. This restaurant is composed of a kitchen and a restaurant that are both equipped to be entirely flexible and allow reproduction of any type of ecological catering environment (
Participants’ characteristics
The characteristics of participants are presented in Table 4. The samples were balanced across treatments in terms of gender distribution. However, the participants in the T1a treatment group were on average slightly younger than those in the other groups. In terms of preferences for vegetables, the cumulated scores (as defined in Table 4) are not statistically different across groups. Self-reported initial and final hunger scores, as well as initial and final wellbeing scores, were not
Discussion
A living lab experiment was conducted in a real self-service environment in order to examine the effects of setting a dish as DoD on consumers’ dish choices. The primary purpose of this research was to replicate the DoD effect in this setting and to investigate under which conditions such a strategy could effectively affect choice. Two factors that are crucial in the set-up of food choice in a cafeteria environment were specifically investigated: the type of dishes available, and the number of
Conclusion
Although exploratory, this work aims to inform the debate on nudges in at least two ways. On the one hand, it presents an experimental investigation of the conditions of the effectiveness of a nudge. This topic has been identified as a key area for further research in recently published meta-analyses (Szaszi et al., 2018); particularly the links between the choice set characteristics and the effect of nudges (Marchiori et al., 2017). Although our paper also describes a context-specific study,
Acknowledgements
This work was conducted as part of the European Research project VeggiEAT, which has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 612326.
We thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for their helpful and constructive feedback on the paper throughout the reviewing process.
References (59)
- et al.
Using insights from behavioral economics to nudge individuals towards healthier choices when eating out: A restaurant experiment
Food Qual. Prefer.
(2019) - et al.
Investigating the conditions for the effectiveness of nudging: Cue-to-action nudging increases familiar vegetable choice
Food Qual. Prefer.
(2019) - et al.
Does restaurant menu information affect customer attitudes and behavioral intentions? A cross-segment empirical analysis using PLS-SEM
Int. J. Hospitality Manage.
(2016) - et al.
“Nudging” as an architect of more responsible consumer choice in food service provision: The role of restaurant menu design
J. Cleaner Prod.
(2017) - et al.
Taxes, labels, or nudges? Public acceptance of various interventions designed to reduce sugar intake
Food Policy
(2018) - et al.
A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010
The Lancet
(2012) - et al.
Examining diners’ decision-making of local food purchase: The role of menu stimuli and involvement
Int. J. Hospitality Manage.
(2018) - et al.
Effect of labeling on new vegetable dish acceptance in preadolescent children
Appetite
(2012) - et al.
More choice is better: Effects of assortment size and composition on assortment evaluation
Int. J. Res. Mark.
(2005) - et al.
Beyond carrots and sticks: Europeans support health nudges
Food Policy
(2017)
Fast and frugal food choices: Uncovering individual decision heuristics
Appetite
Nudging healthier food and beverage choices through salience and priming. Evidence from a systematic review
Food Qual. Prefer.
Are food choices really habitual? Integrating habits, variety-seeking, and compensatory choice in a utility-maximizing framework
Am. J. Agric. Econ.
Increasing vegetable intakes: rationale and systematic review of published interventions
Eur. J. Nutr.
Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4
J. Stat. Softw.
A systematic review of calorie labeling and modified calorie labeling interventions: impact on consumer and restaurant behavior
Obesity
Seeking better health care outcomes: the ethics of using the “Nudge”
Am. J. Bioethics
Policy interventions to promote healthy eating: A review of what works, what does not, and what is promising
Food Nutr. Bull.
Nudging consumers towards healthier choices: A systematic review of positional influences on food choice
Br. J. Nutr.
Vegetable variety: an effective strategy to increase vegetable choice in children
Public Health Nutr.
Improvement of meal composition by vegetable variety
Public Health Nutr.
Motivating sustainable food choices: the role of nudges, value orientation, and information provision
Environ. Behav.
Field experiments in economics: An introduction
Res. Exper. Econ.
Contextual influences on eating behaviors: heuristic processing and dietary choices
Obes. Rev.
Nudge to nobesity II: Menu positions influence food orders
Judgment Decision Making
Studying natural meals: what are the benefits of the living lab approach?
Trends in food and nutritional intakes of French adults from 1999 to 2007: results from the INCA surveys
British J. Nutr.
Comparison of three nudge interventions (priming, default option, and perceived variety) to promote vegetable consumption in a self-service buffet setting
PLoS ONE
Decision time, consideration time, and status quo bias
Econ. Inq.
Cited by (33)
Encouraging sustainable food consumption through nudges: An experiment with menu labels
2024, Ecological EconomicsNudging Toward Sustainable Food Consumption at University Canteens: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
2023, Journal of Nutrition Education and BehaviorIndulgent or informative logos? Effects on university students’ intention to purchase healthy and sustainable food
2023, International Journal of Gastronomy and Food ScienceA role for enjoyment for encouraging fruit consumption
2023, Appetite