Evidence is beginning to accumulate to support the effectiveness of targeting product availability to change behaviour. While the mechanisms underlying the effects of altering availability have not been explored to our knowledge, increasing the availability of product(s) may influence consumption by increasing the visibility or salience of these products to consumers, and/or increased options may lead to these appealing to a wider range of people. less healthy foods, which represents one of the top three interventions suggested in the McKinsey Global Institute report on obesity as having the highest likely impact across the population. One such environmental cue is the availability (including both the number and range) of healthier vs. It has been hypothesised that interventions targeting non-conscious processes regulating behaviour are more effective than more information-based interventions, as they do not necessarily rely on individuals’ cognitive resources. This approach (sometimes termed ‘choice architecture’ or ‘nudging’) is based on dual process models of behaviour. One strategy that may be effective in targeting these behavioural risk factors is to target the physical micro-environment, addressing the multiple cues – aspects of our environments that can influence behaviour – which act detrimentally by limiting healthier options or promoting less healthy ones.

less healthy behaviours are generally more common amongst the poorest, contributing in turn to the substantial socioeconomic inequalities in life expectancy and years lived in good health. Patterns of unhealthy behaviour, including excessive energy intake, are key contributors to these NCDs, and are socially patterned, i.e. Non-communicable diseases (NCDs), including diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cancer, now cause the majority of premature preventable deaths worldwide. Studies are now needed in which choices are made between physically-present foods. Consequently, removing less healthy as opposed to adding healthier food options could have greater impact on healthier choices. less healthy food cues on food choice, suggesting that less healthy food cues have a larger effect than healthier ones. This study provides a novel test of the impact of healthier vs. There were no significant main effects or interactions with cognitive load or socioeconomic status. ResultsĬompared to being offered two healthier and two less healthy options, the odds of choosing a healthier option were twice as high (Odds Ratio (OR): 2.0, 95%CI: 1.6, 2.6) with four additional healthier options, while the odds of choosing a less healthy option were four times higher (OR: 4.3, 95%CI: 3.1, 6.0) with four additional less healthy options. While remembering this number, participants chose the food they would most like to eat from: (a) two healthier and two less healthy foods, (b) six healthier and two less healthy foods, or (c) two healthier and six less healthy foods.

Participants memorised a 7-digit number (7777777: low cognitive load 8529713: high cognitive load). UK adults ( n = 1509) were randomly allocated to one of six groups (two cognitive load x three availability conditions). This online study examined the impact on food choices of the number of (i) healthier and (ii) less healthy snack foods available, and possible moderation by cognitive load and socioeconomic status. Our environments shape our behaviour, but little research has addressed whether healthier cues have a similar impact to less healthy ones.

Healthier food options