Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Dec;16(12):2281-8.
doi: 10.1017/S1368980013001468. Epub 2013 May 28.

Default options, incentives and food choices: evidence from elementary-school children

David Just  1 , Joseph Price
Affiliations

Default options, incentives and food choices: evidence from elementary-school children

David Just et al. Public Health Nutr. 2013 Dec.

Abstract

Objective: To examine whether requiring children to place fruits and vegetables on their lunch trays increases consumption of these items.

Design: Observational study that exploited naturally occurring variation between two school districts and a pre–post observational study at schools that changed their lunch policy mid-year.

Setting: Fifteen elementary schools from two school districts, one requiring students to place a fruit or vegetable on their tray and one that does not. In addition, three schools that implemented a default option part way through the school year.

Subjects: Students at eighteen elementary schools (41 374 child-day observations) across the two experiments.

Results: Requiring that fruits and vegetables be placed on each child's tray increased the fraction of children who ate a serving of fruits or vegetables by 8 percentage points (P < 0·01) but led to an extra 0·7 servings being thrown away per lunch served (P < 0·01). The default option approach cost $US 1·72 to get one additional child to eat one serving of fruits and vegetables for 1 d. However, when default options were combined with a small rewards programme the efficacy of both interventions increased.

Conclusions: A default option, as a stand-alone programme, had only a limited impact on fruit and vegetable consumption but was much less cost-effective than other approaches. Schools requiring children to take fruits and vegetables with their lunch might consider adopting additional interventions to ensure that the additional items served do not end up being thrown away.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The interaction of incentives (formula image, baseline, no incentives; formula image, incentives) and requiring elementary-school students to place fruits or vegetables on their tray at lunchtime on consumption and waste. ‘Ate one serving’ indicates the fraction of students who ate at least one serving of fruits or vegetables; ‘servings wasted’ represents the average number of servings that each student threw away; ‘optional’ and ‘required’ refer to whether students were required to take a serving of fruits or vegetables as part of their school-provided lunch
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Johnson EJ & Goldstein DG (2003) Do defaults save lives? Science 302, 1338–1339. - PubMed
    1. Choi JJ, Laibson D, Madrian BC et al. (2003) Optimal defaults. Am Econ Rev 93, 180–185.
    1. Kahneman D, Knetsch JL & Thaler R (1991) Anomalies: the endowment effect, loss aversion and the status quo bias. J Econ Perspect 5, 193–206.
    1. Samuelson W & Zeckhauser R (1988) Status quo bias in decision-making. J Risk Uncertain 1, 7–59.
    1. Johnson EJ, Bellman S & Lohse GL (2002) Defaults, framing and privacy: why opting in–opting out. Mark Lett 13, 5–15.

Publication types