Comparing Designs for Restaurant Eco-Labels

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The aim of this study is to compare responses to 5 different types of labels for restaurant menus: 1) Control (non-sustainability-label: neutral labels not referencing environmental sustainability); 2) Numeric text-only sustainability label; 3) Endorsement text-only sustainability label; 4) Endorsement icon-only sustainability label; 5) Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability label. Participants will be randomized to 1 of the 5 labeling arms above. Each participant will view 3 labels (shown in random order) from their randomly assigned labeling arm and respond to survey questions about each label (e.g., attention, perceived effectiveness).

Detailed Description
-----------------
This is an online randomized controlled trial. Investigators will recruit participants through a survey company to complete an online survey. In the study, participants will be randomized to 1 of 5 labeling arms: 1) Control (non-sustainability-label: neutral labels not referencing environmental sustainability); 2) Numeric text-only sustainability label; 3) Endorsement text-only sustainability label; 4) Endorsement icon-only sustainability label; 5) Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability label. Participants will be randomized to 1 of the 5 labeling arms above. Each participant will view 3 labels (shown in random order) from their randomly assigned labeling arm and respond to survey questions about each label (e.g., attention, perceived effectiveness).

Official Title
-----------------
Comparing Designs for Environmental Sustainability Eco-Labels for Restaurant Menus

Conditions
-----------------
Food Preferences

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Behavioral: Neutral labels
* Behavioral: Numeric text-only sustainability labels
* Behavioral: Endorsement text-only sustainability labels
* Behavioral: Endorsement icon-only sustainability labels
* Behavioral: Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability labels


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Participants will be US adults Ages 18 or older With an over-sample of adults (50% of total sample) 18-29 years Exclusion Criteria: Younger than 18 Non-US

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Prevention
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Active Comparator: Neutral labels<br>Labels shown will be QR codes with and without neutral text (i.e., not mentioning environmental impacts) | Behavioral: Neutral labels<br>* Participants view neutral labels (QR codes with and without neutral text) for menu items<br>|
| Experimental: Numeric text-only sustainability labels<br>Labels shown will contain numeric text depicting the greenhouse gas emissions associated with production of the menu item | Behavioral: Numeric text-only sustainability labels<br>* Participants view labels with numeric text depicting the greenhouse gas emissions associated with production of the menu item<br>|
| Experimental: Endorsement text-only sustainability labels<br>Labels shown will contain text endorsing menu items as having low environmental impact | Behavioral: Endorsement text-only sustainability labels<br>* Participants view labels using text to endorse menu items as having low environmental impact<br>|
| Experimental: Endorsement icon-only sustainability labels<br>Labels shown will contain icons endorsing menu items as having low environmental impact | Behavioral: Endorsement icon-only sustainability labels<br>* Participants view labels using icons to endorse menu items as having low environmental impact<br>|
| Experimental: Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability labels<br>Labels shown will contain both text and icons endorsing menu items as having low environmental impact | Behavioral: Endorsement text-plus-icon sustainability labels<br>* Participants view labels using text and icons to endorse menu items as having low environmental impact<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Perceived message effectiveness | Participants will rate the extent to which the label makes them want to choose items with the label on a 5-point scale ranging from low (1) to high (5). They will also rate the extent to which the label makes eating items with the label seem appealing to them on a 5-point scale ranging from low (1) to high (5). These items are adapted from the 3-item UNC Perceived Message Effectiveness scale. Investigators will average responses to these two items to create a perceived message effectiveness score, which will also range from low (1) to high (5). Higher scores therefore indicate higher perceived message effectiveness. | The survey will take up to 20 minutes | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Attention | Participants will rate the extent to which the label captures their attention on a 5-point response scale ranging from low (1) to high (5). Higher scores indicate more attention-grabbing labels (a better outcome). | The survey will take up to 20 minutes | 
| Thinking about environmental effects | Participants will rate the extent to which the label makes them think about the environmental impacts of their food choices on a 5-point response scale ranging from low (1) to high (5). Higher scores indicate labels elicit more thinking about environmental effects (a better outcome). | The survey will take up to 20 minutes | 
| Anticipated social interactions | Participants will rate how likely they are to talk about the label with others in the next week on a 5-point response scale ranging from low (1) to high (5). Higher scores indicate labels elicit more anticipated social interactions (a better outcome). | The survey will take up to 20 minutes | 
| Believability | Participants will rate how believable the label is on a 5-point response scale ranging from low (1) to high (5). Higher scores indicate labels are more believable (a better outcome). | The survey will take up to 20 minutes | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
food labeling, sustainability, diet, food choices