Labeling restaurant menus with calorie counts is a popular public health intervention, but research shows these labels have small, inconsistent effects on behavior. Supplementing calorie counts with physical activity equivalents may produce stronger results, but few studies of these enhanced labels have been conducted, and the labels' potential to influence exercise-related outcomes remains unexplored. This online study evaluated the impact of no information, calories-only, and calories plus equivalent miles of walking labels on fast food item selection and exercise-related attitudes, perceptions, and intentions. Participants (N = 643) were randomly assigned to a labeling condition and completed a menu ordering task followed by measures of exercise-related outcomes. The labels had little effect on ordering behavior, with no significant differences in total calories ordered and counterintuitive increases in calories ordered in the two informational conditions in some item categories. The labels also had little impact on the exercise-related outcomes, though participants in the two informational conditions perceived exercise as less enjoyable than did participants in the no information condition, and trends following the same pattern were found for other exercise-related outcomes. The present findings concur with literature demonstrating small, inconsistent effects of current menu labeling strategies and suggest that alternatives such as traffic light systems should be explored.
INTRODUCTION: Numeric calorie content labels show limited efficacy in reducing the number of calories ordered from fast food meals. Physical activity calorie equivalent (PACE) labels are an alternative that may reduce the number of calories ordered in fast food meals while encouraging patrons to exercise.
METHODS: A total of 1000 adults from 47 US states were randomly assigned via internet survey to one of four generic fast food menus: no label, calories only, calories + minutes, or calories + miles necessary to walk to burn off the calories. After completing hypothetical orders participants were asked to rate the likelihood of calorie-only and PACE labels to influence (1) food choice and (2) physical activity.
RESULTS: Respondents (n = 823) ordered a median of 1580 calories from the no-label menu, 1200 from the calories-only menu, 1140 from the calories + minutes menu, and 1210 from the calories + miles menu (p = 0.0001). 40% of respondents reported that PACE labels were "very likely" to influence food item choice vs. 28% for calorie-only labels (p<0.0001). 64% of participants reported that PACE labels were "somewhat likely" or "very likely" to influence their level of physical activity vs. 49% for calorie-only labels (p<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: PACE labels may be helpful in reducing the number of calories ordered in fast food meals and may have the added benefit of encouraging exercise.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and consumer preferences of calorie labeling on menus.
DESIGN: Between-group experiment. Participants were randomized to view menu items according to 1 of 4 experimental conditions: no calorie information, calorie-only information, calorie plus health statement (HS), and calorie plus the Physical Activity Scale. Participants selected a snack and then rated menus from all conditions on the level of understanding and perceived effectiveness.
SETTING: University of Waterloo, Canada.
PARTICIPANTS: A total of 213 undergraduate university students recruited from classrooms.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The calorie amount of menu selection and ratings of understandability and perceived effectiveness.
ANALYSIS: Linear regression models and chi-square tests.
RESULTS: Participants who selected items from menus without calorie information selected snacks with higher calorie amounts than participants in the calorie-only condition (P = .002) and the calorie plus HS condition (P = .001). The calorie plus HS menu was perceived as most understandable and the calorie plus calorie plus Physical Activity Scale menu was perceived as most effective in helping to promote healthy eating.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Calorie labeling on menus may assist consumers in making healthier choices, with consumer preference for menus that include contextual health statements.
In this study we examined the effect of physical activity based labels on the calorie content of meals selected from a sample fast food menu. Using a web-based survey, participants were randomly assigned to one of four menus which differed only in their labeling schemes (n=802): (1) a menu with no nutritional information, (2) a menu with calorie information, (3) a menu with calorie information and minutes to walk to burn those calories, or (4) a menu with calorie information and miles to walk to burn those calories. There was a significant difference in the mean number of calories ordered based on menu type (p=0.02), with an average of 1020 calories ordered from a menu with no nutritional information, 927 calories ordered from a menu with only calorie information, 916 calories ordered from a menu with both calorie information and minutes to walk to burn those calories, and 826 calories ordered from the menu with calorie information and the number of miles to walk to burn those calories. The menu with calories and the number of miles to walk to burn those calories appeared the most effective in influencing the selection of lower calorie meals (p=0.0007) when compared to the menu with no nutritional information provided. The majority of participants (82%) reported a preference for physical activity based menu labels over labels with calorie information alone and no nutritional information. Whether these labels are effective in real-life scenarios remains to be tested.
