Why can calorie posting be apparently ineffective? The roles of two conflicting learning effects

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    We investigate why the aggregate effect of calorie posting on calorie consumption can be insignificant by decomposing the learning effect into two conflicting components: a calorie-decreasing effect of learning that one was underestimating caloric content (LUE), and a calorie-increasing effect of learning that one was overestimating caloric content (LOE). Our lab snack-order experiments demonstrate the existence of the LUE effect (−8.3%) and the LOE effect (+4.8%), where the aggregate learning effect is −5.8%. Our results also imply that the LUE can be cancelled out by a positive saliency effect, while the undesirable saliency effect may be mitigated by combining the calorie posting with information about daily calorie needs.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)107-120
    Number of pages14
    JournalFood Policy
    Volume64
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2016 Oct 1

    Fingerprint

    learning success
    learning
    Learning
    energy content
    light use efficiency
    Snacks
    snacks
    adverse effects
    effect
    Learning effect
    experiment

    Keywords

    • Calorie consumption
    • Calorie posting
    • Laboratory experiment
    • Learning

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Food Science
    • Development
    • Sociology and Political Science
    • Economics and Econometrics
    • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

    Cite this

    Why can calorie posting be apparently ineffective? The roles of two conflicting learning effects. / Shimokawa, Satoru.

    In: Food Policy, Vol. 64, 01.10.2016, p. 107-120.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{fcd3c859db58424b9f021533a8b24701,
    title = "Why can calorie posting be apparently ineffective? The roles of two conflicting learning effects",
    abstract = "We investigate why the aggregate effect of calorie posting on calorie consumption can be insignificant by decomposing the learning effect into two conflicting components: a calorie-decreasing effect of learning that one was underestimating caloric content (LUE), and a calorie-increasing effect of learning that one was overestimating caloric content (LOE). Our lab snack-order experiments demonstrate the existence of the LUE effect (−8.3{\%}) and the LOE effect (+4.8{\%}), where the aggregate learning effect is −5.8{\%}. Our results also imply that the LUE can be cancelled out by a positive saliency effect, while the undesirable saliency effect may be mitigated by combining the calorie posting with information about daily calorie needs.",
    keywords = "Calorie consumption, Calorie posting, Laboratory experiment, Learning",
    author = "Satoru Shimokawa",
    year = "2016",
    month = "10",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.09.007",
    language = "English",
    volume = "64",
    pages = "107--120",
    journal = "Food Policy",
    issn = "0306-9192",
    publisher = "Elsevier BV",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Why can calorie posting be apparently ineffective? The roles of two conflicting learning effects

    AU - Shimokawa, Satoru

    PY - 2016/10/1

    Y1 - 2016/10/1

    N2 - We investigate why the aggregate effect of calorie posting on calorie consumption can be insignificant by decomposing the learning effect into two conflicting components: a calorie-decreasing effect of learning that one was underestimating caloric content (LUE), and a calorie-increasing effect of learning that one was overestimating caloric content (LOE). Our lab snack-order experiments demonstrate the existence of the LUE effect (−8.3%) and the LOE effect (+4.8%), where the aggregate learning effect is −5.8%. Our results also imply that the LUE can be cancelled out by a positive saliency effect, while the undesirable saliency effect may be mitigated by combining the calorie posting with information about daily calorie needs.

    AB - We investigate why the aggregate effect of calorie posting on calorie consumption can be insignificant by decomposing the learning effect into two conflicting components: a calorie-decreasing effect of learning that one was underestimating caloric content (LUE), and a calorie-increasing effect of learning that one was overestimating caloric content (LOE). Our lab snack-order experiments demonstrate the existence of the LUE effect (−8.3%) and the LOE effect (+4.8%), where the aggregate learning effect is −5.8%. Our results also imply that the LUE can be cancelled out by a positive saliency effect, while the undesirable saliency effect may be mitigated by combining the calorie posting with information about daily calorie needs.

    KW - Calorie consumption

    KW - Calorie posting

    KW - Laboratory experiment

    KW - Learning

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84991780978&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84991780978&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.09.007

    DO - 10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.09.007

    M3 - Article

    AN - SCOPUS:84991780978

    VL - 64

    SP - 107

    EP - 120

    JO - Food Policy

    JF - Food Policy

    SN - 0306-9192

    ER -