Dataset Information

Influence of the San Francisco, CA, Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Health Warning on Consumer Reactions: Implications for Equity from a Randomized Experiment.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In 2020, San Francisco, CA, amended an ordinance requiring warning labels on advertisements for sugary drinks to update the warning message. No studies have evaluated consumer responses to the revised message.

Objectives

To evaluate responses to the 2020 San Francisco sugary drink warning label and to assess whether these responses differ by demographic characteristics.

Design

Randomized experiment.

Participants and setting

During 2020, a convenience sample of US parents of children aged 6 months to 5 years (N = 2,160 included in primary analyses) was recruited via an online panel to complete a survey. Oversampling was used to achieve a diverse sample (49% Hispanic/Latino[a], 34% non-Hispanic Black, and 9% non-Hispanic White).

Methods

Participants were randomly assigned to view a control label ("Always read the Nutrition Facts Panel") or the 2020 San Francisco sugary drink warning label ("SAN FRANCISCO GOVERNMENT WARNING: Drinking beverages with added sugar(s) can cause weight gain, which increases the risk of obesity and type 2 diabetes."). Messages were shown in white text on black rectangular labels.

Main outcome measures

Participants rated the labels on thinking about health harms of sugary drink consumption (primary outcome) and perceived discouragement from wanting to consume sugary drinks. The survey was available in English and Spanish.

Statistical analyses performed

Ordinary least squares regression.

Results

The San Francisco warning label elicited more thinking about health harms (Cohen's d = 0.24; P < 0.001) than the control label. The San Francisco warning label also led to more discouragement from wanting to consume sugary drinks than the control label (d = 0.31; P < 0.001). The warning label's influence on thinking about harms did not differ by any participant characteristics, including age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, income, or language of survey administration (all P values for interactions > 0.12).

Conclusions

San Francisco's 2020 sugary drink warning label may be a promising policy for informing consumers and encouraging healthier beverage choices across groups with diverse demographic characteristics.

SUBMITTER: Grummon AH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9127741 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Influence of the San Francisco, CA, Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Health Warning on Consumer Reactions: Implications for Equity from a Randomized Experiment.

Grummon Anna H AH Reimold Alexandria E AE Hall Marissa G MG

Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 20210827 2

<h4>Background</h4>In 2020, San Francisco, CA, amended an ordinance requiring warning labels on advertisements for sugary drinks to update the warning message. No studies have evaluated consumer responses to the revised message.<h4>Objectives</h4>To evaluate responses to the 2020 San Francisco sugary drink warning label and to assess whether these responses differ by demographic characteristics.<h4>Design</h4>Randomized experiment.<h4>Participants and setting</h4>During 2020, a convenience sampl ...[more]

PMID: 34465443

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFew longitudinal studies examine the response to beverage taxes, especially among regular sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumers.ObjectiveThis study aimed to examine changes in objectively measured beverage purchases associated with the Philadelphia beverage tax on sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages.MethodsA longitudinal quasi-experiment was conducted with adult sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumers in Philadelphia (n = 306) and Baltimore (n = 297; a nontaxed comparison city). From 2016 to 2017 participants submitted all food and beverage receipts during a 2-wk period at: baseline (pretax) and 3, 6, and 12 mo posttax (91.0% retention; data analyzed in 2019). Linear mixed effects models were used to assess the difference-in-differences in total purchased ounces (fl oz) of taxed beverages in a 2-wk period in Philadelphia compared with Baltimore. Secondary analyses: 1) excluded weeks that contained major holidays at baseline and 12 mo (42% of measured weeks at baseline and 12 mo) because policy implementation timing necessitated data collection during holidays when SSB demand may be more inelastic, and 2) aggregated posttax time points to address serial correlation and low power.ResultsThere were no statistically significant changes in purchased ounces of taxed beverages in Philadelphia compared with Baltimore in the primary analysis. After excluding holiday purchasing, the tax was associated with statistically significant reductions of taxed beverage purchases at 3 and 6 mo (-157.1 ounces, 95% CI: -310.1, -4.1 and -175.1 ounces, 95% CI: -328.0, -22.3, respectively) but not 12 mo. Analyses aggregating all 6 wk of posttax time points showed statistically significant reductions (-203.7 ounces, 95% CI: -399.6, -7.8).ConclusionsA sweetened beverage tax was not associated with reduced taxed beverage purchases among SSB consumers 12 mo posttax in the full sample. Both secondary analyses excluding holiday purchasing or aggregating posttax time periods found reductions in taxed beverage purchases ranging from -4.9 to -12.5 ounces per day. Larger longitudinal studies are needed to further understand tax effects.

Dataset Information

Influence of the San Francisco, CA, Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Health Warning on Consumer Reactions: Implications for Equity from a Randomized Experiment.

Background

Objectives

Design

Participants and setting

Methods

Main outcome measures

Statistical analyses performed

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Influence of the San Francisco, CA, Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Health Warning on Consumer Reactions: Implications for Equity from a Randomized Experiment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets