Brian Wansink

The Biasing Health Halos of Fast Food Restaurant Health Claims: Lower Calorie Estimates and Higher Side-Dish Consumption Intentions

Why is America a land of low-calorie food claims yet high-calorie food intake? Four studies show that people are more likely to underestimate the caloric content of main dishes and to choose higher-calorie side dishes, drinks, or desserts when fast-food restaurants claim to be healthy (e.g., Subway) compared to when they do not (e.g., McDonald’s). We also find that the effect of these health halos can be eliminated by simply asking people to consider whether the opposite of such health claims may be true. These studies help explain why the success of fastfood restaurants serving lower-calorie foods has not led to the expected reduction in total calorie intake and in obesity rates. They also suggest innovative strategies for consumers, marketers, and policy makers searching for ways to fight obesity.

Can 'Low Fat' Nutrition Labels Lead to Obesity?

In this era of increasing obesity and increasing threats of legislation and regulation of food marketing practices, regulatory agencies have pointedly asked how “low-fat” nutrition claims may influence food consumption. The authors develop and test a framework that contends that low-fat nutrition labels increase food intake by (1) increasing perceptions of the appropriate serving size and (2) decreasing consumption guilt. Three studies show that low-fat labels lead all consumers—particularly those who are overweight—to overeat snack foods. Furthermore, salient objective serving-size information (e.g., “Contains 2 Servings”) reduces overeating among guilt-prone, normal-weight consumers but not among overweight consumers. With consumer welfare and corporate profitability in mind, the authors suggest win-win packaging and labeling insights for public policy officials and food marketers.

The Influence of Assortment Structure on Perceived Variety and Consumption Quantities

Increasing the actual variety of an assortment has been shown previously to increase the quantity consumed. We show, however, that consumption quantities are also influenced by the perceived variety of an assortment. In combination, six lab and field studies show that the structure of an assortment (e.g., organization and symmetry or entropy) moderates the effect of actual variety on perceived variety. We further show that it is perceived variety that in turn influences consumption quantities through anticipated consumption utility. Making salient other consumption rules, such as size of the assortment, moderates this effect. These findings are of immediate relevance to interdisciplinary researchers and to consumers and health practitioners who wish to better control food consumption.

Mindless Eating The 200 Daily Food Decisions We Overlook

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.

Exploring Comfort Food Preferences Across Age and Gender

Building on findings related to physiological and psychological motivations of food preference, this research develops a framework to examine preferences toward comfort foods. Study 1 used a North American survey of 411 people to determine favored comfort foods, and Study 2 quantified the preferences for these foods across gender and across age groups using a stratified sample of 1005 additional people. Consistent with hypotheses, the findings showed different comfort food preferences across gender and across age. Males preferred warm, hearty, meal-related comfort foods (such as steak, casseroles, and soup), while females instead preferred comfort foods that were more snack related (such as chocolate and ice cream). In addition, younger people preferred more snack-related comfort foods compared to those over 55 years of age. Associations with guilty feelings underscored how these different preferences between males and females may extend to areas of application.

Bad popcorn in big buckets: portion size can influence intake as much as taste.

OBJECTIVE It is often believed that people overeat the foods they like. We investigated whether environmental cues such as packaging and container size are so powerful that they can increase our intake of foods that are less palatable. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In a 2 x 2 between-subjects design, 158 moviegoers in Philadelphia (57.6% male; 28.7 years) were randomly given a medium (120 g) or a large (240 g) container of free popcorn that was either fresh or stale (14 days old). Following the movie, consumption measures were taken, along with measures of perceived taste. OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS Moviegoers who were given fresh popcorn ate 45.3% more popcorn when it was given to them in large containers. This container-size influence is so powerful that even when the popcorn was disliked, people still ate 33.6% more popcorn when eating from a large container than from a medium-size container. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS Even when foods are not palatable, large packages and containers can lead to overeating. The silver lining of these findings may be that portion size can also be used to increase the consumption of less preferred healthful foods, such as raw vegetables.

Bottoms Up! The Influence of Elongation on Pouring and Consumption Volume

Although the effects of shapes on area perceptions have been widely investigated, we replicate, extend, and generalize one of the few studies to relate the effects of shapes to consumption volumes (Raghubir and Krishna 1999). While Raghubir and Krishna demonstrate the effect of the elongation of prepoured drinks on consumption volume, we have people pour their own drinks in a series of controlled field experiments. Two experiments in cafeterias show that both children and adults pour and consume more juice when given a short, wide glass compared to those given a tall, slender glass, but they perceive the opposite to be true. We conclude that the elongation of glasses negatively influences consumption volume in a single-serving context. A third potentially policy-relevant field experiment conducted with Philadelphia bartenders and liquor shows that the effect of elongation is moderated but not eliminated with pouring experience. Copyright 2003 by the University of Chicago.

Does food marketing need to make us fat? a review and solutions

Food marketing is often singled out as the leading cause of the obesity epidemic. The present review examines current food marketing practices to determine how exactly they may be influencing food intake, and how food marketers could meet their business objectives while helping people eat healthier. Particular attention is paid to the insights provided by recently published studies in the areas of marketing and consumer research, and those insights are integrated with findings from studies in nutrition and related disciplines. The review begins with an examination of the multiple ways in which 1) food pricing strategies and 2) marketing communication (including branding and food claims) bias food consumption. It then describes the effects of newer and less conspicuous marketing actions, focusing on 3) packaging (including the effects of package design and package-based claims) and 4) the eating environment (including the availability, salience, and convenience of food). Throughout, this review underscores the promising opportunities that food manufacturers and retailers have to make profitable “win-win” adjustments to help consumers eat better.

A Note on Modeling Consumer Reactions to a Crisis: The Case of the Mad Cow Disease

What drives the behavior of consumers when faced with a product-related crisis, such as that involving food contamination or life-threatening design flaws? For both consumers and companies, these crises have become of increasing importance because of the globalization of markets and an increased coverage by the media. Marketers need to understand why and how consumers react to a crisis. We show that by decoupling risk response behavior of consumers into the separate components of risk perception and risk attitude, a more robust conceptualization and prediction of consumers’ reactions is possible. Such a framework helps provide answers on how marketers can deal with such types of crises. The merits of this conceptualization are illustrated in two field studies that examine the reactions of German, Dutch, and American consumers to the BSE (mad cow disease) crisis. D 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

The Influence of Incidental Affect on Consumers’ Food Intake

Although incidental affect has been shown to influence both attitude and purchase behavior, it has not been extended to actual consumption. This research investigates whether specific affective states influence food consumption and whether this influence is moderated by factors such as information and the nature of the product (hedonic versus less hedonic). The authors show that an integrative mood management and mood evaluation framework accounts for this relationship more effectively than a self-regulation explanation. A preliminary test and two lab studies show that people eat larger amounts of hedonic foods (buttered popcorn and M&Ms) when they are in a sad state than when they are in a happy state and that this effect is attenuated when nutritional information is present. In contrast, they tend to eat larger amounts of a less hedonic product (raisins) when they are in a happy state than when they are in a sad state. The authors discuss implications for responsible marketers, health professionals, and health conscious consumers in the context of campaigns and individual efforts.