Emotional reactions to food interventions: Evidence from an online survey

IF 1.2 Q3 ECONOMICS

Research in Economics Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.rie.2023.06.002

Beatrice Braut , Sarah Zaccagni

引用次数: 0

Abstract

We conduct an online survey to test whether interventions to foster individual motivation to eat healthy change emotional reactions to food choices. By keeping constant the change in food choice, we test if different policies evoke different emotions. The hypothetical interventions consist of a price discount or a reminder of the importance of adhering to a healthy diet. We compare the effects of the two interventions on the emotions declared at the end of the survey and on the gap between the emotions proclaimed at the beginning and the end. We find that the price discount has a positive effect on the emotional reaction of the subjects. In contrast, the reminder does not affect emotions. The positive impact of the price discount is more substantial among youth, suggesting that this age group is more sensitive to monetary incentives.

查看原文本刊更多论文

对食物干预的情绪反应：来自一项在线调查的证据

我们进行了一项在线调查，以测试促进个人健康饮食动机的干预措施是否会改变对食物选择的情绪反应。通过保持食物选择的变化不变，我们测试了不同的政策是否会引起不同的情绪。假设的干预措施包括价格折扣或提醒坚持健康饮食的重要性。我们比较了两种干预对调查结束时宣布的情绪的影响，以及调查开始和结束时宣布的情绪之间的差距。我们发现价格折扣对被试的情绪反应有正向影响。相反，提醒不会影响情绪。价格折扣的积极影响在年轻人中更为显著，这表明这个年龄组对金钱激励更为敏感。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Research in Economics ECONOMICS-

CiteScore

1.40

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

89 days

期刊介绍： Established in 1947, Research in Economics is one of the oldest general-interest economics journals in the world and the main one among those based in Italy. The purpose of the journal is to select original theoretical and empirical articles that will have high impact on the debate in the social sciences; since 1947, it has published important research contributions on a wide range of topics. A summary of our editorial policy is this: the editors make a preliminary assessment of whether the results of a paper, if correct, are worth publishing. If so one of the associate editors reviews the paper: from the reviewer we expect to learn if the paper is understandable and coherent and - within reasonable bounds - the results are correct. We believe that long lags in publication and multiple demands for revision simply slow scientific progress. Our goal is to provide you a definitive answer within one month of submission. We give the editors one week to judge the overall contribution and if acceptable send your paper to an associate editor. We expect the associate editor to provide a more detailed evaluation within three weeks so that the editors can make a final decision before the month expires. In the (rare) case of a revision we allow four months and in the case of conditional acceptance we allow two months to submit the final version. In both cases we expect a cover letter explaining how you met the requirements. For conditional acceptance the editors will verify that the requirements were met. In the case of revision the original associate editor will do so. If the revision cannot be at least conditionally accepted it is rejected: there is no second revision.