Suchergebnisse

Built environments at many scales influence the type and amount of food consumed. Macroscale food systems and food landscapes influence food choices, and microscale rooms, furniture, containers, and objects influence food intake. The authors review literature about how four ubiquitous microscale built environments are persistent but often unrecognized influences on food intake. Kitchenscapes influence food intake through availability, diversity, and visibility of foods; tablescapes through variety, abundance, and accessibility; platescapes through portion and/or package size, arrangement, and utensil type; and food-scapes through food-item forms and landmarks. Microgeographies of built environments provide a subtle, pervasive, and often unconscious influence on food choices, food intake, obesity, and health. Reengineering built environments may offer opportunities to shape food intake.

How aware are people of food-related decisions they make and how the environment influences these decisions? Study 1 shows that 139 people underestimated the number of food-related decisions they made—by an average of more than 221 decisions. Study 2 examined 192 people who overserved and overate 31% more food as a result of having been given an exaggerated environmental cue (such as a large bowl). Of those studied, 21% denied having eaten more, 75% attributed it to other reasons (such as hunger), and only 4% attributed it to the cue. These studies underscore two key points: First, we are aware of only a fraction of the food decisions we make. Second, we are either unaware of how our environment influences these decisions or we are unwilling to acknowledge it.

Although proponents assume that good science sells and that the biotechnology issue will soon become a nonissue, opponents of biotechnology assume that consumers want to be informed and that the risks of the unknown are more important than benefits. Using current models of consumer behavior, this article examines eight incorrect assumptions about consumers. Understanding the processing style of consumers and how it influences their attitudes suggests changes that both opponents and proponents can make to educate consumers more effectively.

AbstractBoundary research can be risky, but it can also move academic disciplines into wider areas of influence. To help reduce the risk and increase the reward, this article describes new tools that boundary researchers can use to get started, published, and promoted. These include writing for surprising impact, positioning their research against a larger theme, developing a research impact matrix for promotion, and estimating a 10‐year citation record. These tools can help move a boundary research area from fringe to focus. © 2016 The Authors. Journal of Consumer Behaviour published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Abstract
Despite the challenged contention that consumers serve more onto larger dinnerware, it remains unclear what would cause this and who might be most at risk. The results of five studies suggest that the neglected Delboeuf illusion may explain how the size of dinnerware creates two opposing biases that lead people to overserve on larger plates and bowls and underserve on smaller ones. A countercyclical sinus-shaped relationship is shown to exist between these serving biases and the relative gap between the edge of the food and the edge of the dinnerware. Although these serving biases are difficult to eliminate with attention and education, changing the color of one's dinnerware or tablecloth may help attenuate them. By showing that the Delboeuf illusion offers a mechanistic explanation for how dinnerware size can bias serving and intake, we open new theoretical opportunities for linking illusions to eating behavior and suggest how simple changes in design can improve consumer welfare.

To what extent do cereal spokes-characters make eye contact with children versus adults, and does their eye contact influence choice? In study 1, the shelf placement and eye positioning of 86 cereal spokes-characters were evaluated in 10 grocery stores in the Eastern United States. We calculated the average height of cereal boxes on the shelf for adult- versus children-oriented cereals (48 in. vs. 23 in.) and the inflection angle of spokes-characters' gaze (0.4° vs. −9.6°). We found that cereal characters on child- (adult-) oriented cereals make incidental eye contact at children's (adults') eye level. In Study 2, we showed that eye contact with cereal spokes-characters increased feelings of trust and connection to the brand, as well as choice of the brand over competitors. Currently, many of the cereals targeted toward children are of the heavily sugared, less healthy variety. One potential application of this finding would be to use eye contact with spokes-characters to promote healthy choices and healthier food consumption.