Outcome Evaluation of a Pilot Study Using “Nudges”

Jayna M. Dave; Tzu-An Chen; Amanda M. Oceguera; Karen W. Cullen; Deborah I. Thompson

doi:10.6000/1929-4247.2015.04.01.3

Authors

Jayna M. Dave Department of Pediatrics – Nutrition, USDA/ARS Children's Nutrition Research Center, Baylor College of Medicine, 1100 Bates Street, Houston, TX 77030, USA
Tzu-An Chen Department of Pediatrics – Nutrition, USDA/ARS Children's Nutrition Research Center, Baylor College of Medicine, 1100 Bates Street, Houston, TX 77030, USA
Amanda M. Oceguera Department of Pediatrics – Nutrition, USDA/ARS Children's Nutrition Research Center, Baylor College of Medicine, 1100 Bates Street, Houston, TX 77030, USA
Karen W. Cullen Houston Independent School District, Hattie Mae White Educational Support Center, 4400 West 18Th Street, Houston, TX 77092, USA
Deborah I. Thompson Department of Pediatrics – Nutrition, USDA/ARS Children's Nutrition Research Center, Baylor College of Medicine, 1100 Bates Street, Houston, TX 77030, USA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.6000/1929-4247.2015.04.01.3

Keywords:

National School Lunch Program, fruit, vegetables, behavioral economics, environment, school, cafeteria.

Abstract

Background: Every school day, over 31 million U.S. children eat school lunches. Unfortunately, students often do not choose the healthy options in the school cafeteria. This paper describes outcome results of a pilot study using “nudges” to improve elementary school students’ fruits and vegetables selections.

Methods: A pilot study was conducted from January to May 2012, in six intervention schools and 2 control schools. A behavioral economics-based intervention was conducted using “nudges” or cues from the cafeteria (staff encouragement to select fruit and vegetables, food labels, “Harvest of the Month” posters), school (morning announcement messages, prompts regarding cafeteria food selections), and parents (school newsletter articles, parent listserve messages) to promote students’ selection of fruits and vegetables in the school cafeteria. The serving data from the point-of-service machine provided fruits and vegetables served per student per day.

Results: There were no significant differences in the number of servings of fruits and vegetables served per student per day, averaged over the study period. Process data revealed low implementation of the intervention components, which may partially explain results.

Conclusions: Low implementation of nudges led to non-significant results in this pilot study. However, providing environmental cues are important and warrant further research with full implementation. Starting 2012, the new meal pattern includes two vegetables and a fruit serving for lunch; and two fruit servings for breakfast. Minimal cost interventions should be explored to facilitate successful implementation of new school meal guidelines.

References

Fox MK, Hamilton W, Lin BH. Effects of Food Assistance and Nutrition Programs on Nutrition and Health:Volume 4, Executive Summary of the Literature Review. USDA/ERS/ Food Assistance and Nutrition Research Report No. 19-4. (FANRR19-4). Available from http://www.ers.usda.gov/ media/872891/fanrr19-4_002.pdf. Accessed October 30, 2013.

Food and Nutrition Service - U.S. Department of Agriculture. National School Lunch Program Fact Sheet. 2012; Available from http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/NSLPFact Sheet.pdf. Accessed October 30, 2013.

Cullen KW, Zakeri IE. Fruits, vegetables, milk, and sweetened beverages consumption and access to a la carte/snack bar meals at school. Am J Public Health 2004; 94: 463-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.94.3.463

French SA, Stables G. Environmental interventions to promote vegetable and fruit consumption among youth in school settings. Prev Med 2003; 37(Pt 1): 593-610. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2003.09.007

Stallings V, Taylor C, eds. Nutrition Standards and Meal Requirements for National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs: Phase I. Proposed Approach for Recommending Revisions. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press 2008.

Maskarinec G, Novotny R, Tasaki K. Dietary patterns are associated with body mass index in multiethnic women. J Nutr 2000; 130: 3068-72.

Thaler RH, Sunstein CR. Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press 2008.

Bandura A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall 1986.

Mancino L, Guthrie J. When Nudging in the Lunch Line Might Be a Good Thing. Amber Waves (Economic Research Service/USDA) 2009; 7: 32-8.

Perry CL, Bishop DB, Taylor GL, et al. A randomized school trial of environmental strategies to encourage fruit and vegetable consumption among children. Health Educ Behav 2004; 31: 65-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1090198103255530

Schwartz MB. The influence of a verbal prompt on school lunch fruit consumption: a pilot study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2007; 4: 6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-4-6

Hendy HM. Comparison of five teacher actions to encourage children's new food acceptance. Ann Behav Med 1999; 21: 20-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02895029

Fulkerson JA, French SA, Story M, Snyder P, Paddock M. Foodservice staff perceptions of their influence on student food choices. J Am Diet Assoc 2002; 102: 97-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0002-8223(02)90029-5

Cullen K, Dave JM, Oceguera A, Thompson DI, Chen T-A. The feasibility of using "nudges" in the school food environment to influence healthy food choices at school. 2013; Available from https://archive.org/details/ CAT31132092. Accessed October 30, 2013.

Texas Department of Agriculture/Food and Nutrition Division. Food and Nutrition. 2010; Available from http://www.squaremeals.org/. Accessed October 30, 2013.

Thompson VJ, Bachman CM, Baranowski T, Cullen KW. Self-efficacy and norm measures for lunch fruit and vegetable consumption are reliable and valid among fifth grade students. J Nutr Educ Behav 2007; 39: 2-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2006.06.006

Salvy SJ, Romero N, Paluch R, Epstein LH. Peer influence on pre-adolescent girls' snack intake: effects of weight status. Appetite 2007; 49: 177-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2007.01.011

Knoke D, Yang S. Social Network Analysis. California: Sage Publications, Inc.; 2008.

Wansink B, Just DR, Hanks AS, Smith LE. Pre-sliced fruit in school cafeterias: children's selection and intake. Am J Prev Med 2013; 44: 477-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2013.02.003

Wansink B, Just DR, Payne CR, Klinger MZ. Attractive names sustain increased vegetable intake in schools. Prev Med 2012; 55: 330-2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.07.012

Davis M, Baranowski T, Resnicow K, et al. Gimme 5 fruit and vegetables for fun and health: process evaluation. Health Educ Behav 2000; 27: 167-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/109019810002700203

Johnson RL, Saha S, Arbelaez JJ, Beach MC, Cooper LA. Racial and ethnic differences in patient perceptions of bias and cultural competence in health care. J Gen Intern Med 2004; 19: 101-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30262.x

Fitzgerald PL, Walters C. Sweet tweets! School Nutrition 2010; September.

Yates A, Edman J, Aruguete M. Ethnic differences in BMI and body/self-dissatisfaction among Whites, Asian subgroups, Pacific Islanders, and African-Americans. J Adolesc Health 2004; 34: 300-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2003.07.014

Food and Nutrition Service - U.S. Department of Agriculture. Team Nutrition. 2013. Available from http://teamnutrition. usda.gov/. Accessed October 30, 2013.

Lefebvre RC, Olander C, Levine E. The impact of multiple channel delivery of nutrition messages on student knowledge, motivation and behavior: Results from the Team Nutrition Pilot Study. Soc Mar Q 1999; 5: 90-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15245004.1999.9961070

Food and Nutrition Service - U.S. Department of Agriculture. Nutrition Standards in the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs; Final Rule. Federal Register 2012; 77(Part II): 4088-167.