smarter lunchrooms movement: low-cost, no-cost...

Smarter Lunchrooms Movement:

Low-Cost, No-Cost Changes

Brian Wansink, Ph.D.

Dyson School of Applied Economics

& Management

©Wansink 2013

The Smarter Lunchroom Movement

I’ll talk about 5 students & 3 MYTHS (Chapters 2-3) that lead us to unknowingly bias what and how much we eat.

I’ll show how this relates to The Smarter Lunchroom Initiative

I’ll tie this all together in 1 slide

©Wansink 2013

To Discover and Uncover Our

Food Traps and to Change Them

Who? Post-Docs Sabbatical/Visiting professors Interdisciplinary Grad students Undergrads (max of 2 per field) Summer Interns & exchange students

How?

• Lab (psych) experiments

• Field studies

• Surveys

• Consumer panels

• Data-base mining

• “Hidden” In-kitchen cameras

©Wansink 2013

Eating Myth #1

“Surely something as basic as the size of a

bowl wouldn’t influence how much an

informed intelligent person eats.”

©Wansink 2013

Would Big Bowls Lead Us to Eat More

Even If We Didn’t Like the Food?

The Field Study (Chicago, IL)

– 168 Moviegoers to Mel Gibson’s “Payback”

– Free (preweighed) popcorn (“Illinois History Month”) • Large or X-Large Popcorn (pre-weighed)

• Fresh or 5-day-old Popcorn

– After the movie . . . • Asked how much they thought they ate

• Weighed the remaining popcorn

Wansink, Brian and Junyong Kim (2005), “Bad Popcorn in Big Buckets:

Portion Size Can Influence Intake as Much as Taste, “ Journal of Nutrition

Education and Behavior, 37, 112-120..

©Wansink 2013

Taste is Important,

But Size Matters -- a Lot • People ate 45% more fresh

popcorn from the extra-large containers than large ones

But . . .

• They even when the popcorn was stale, they ate 34% more from the extra-large buckets

• The danger? They don’t realize they do it -- “Not me”

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Large

Bucket

Extra-

Large

Bucket

Fresh

5 DaysOld

Wansink, Brian and Junyong Kim (2005), “Bad Popcorn in Big Buckets:

Portion Size Can Influence Intake as Much as Taste, “ Journal of Nutrition

Education and Behavior, 37, 112-120.. ©Wansink 2013

When Does This Begin?

©Wansink 2013

At Age 4, Larger Bowls Led Kids of All Weights to Serve

More

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

18.9 20.0 23.6 49.6 65.7 70.5 73.1 77.7 81.9 82.1 85.7 88.8 97.6 98.5

Small Bowl

Large Bowl

Amount

of Cereal

Requeste

d (grams)

BMI Percentiles

(Adjusted for Age and Sex)

©Wansink 2013

Eating Myth #2

“OK, so people serve more from

big bowls and plates and wide

glasses.

“At least they know when they

are full and they can stop before

they overeat” ©Wansink 2013

Would You Keep Eating

if Your Bowl Never Emptied?

• “Clean Plate Club” -- Some people use empty bowls & plates as a cue they’re done eating

– If bowl isn’t empty, they keep eating

– What if it never empties?

• We Designed a Bottomless Bowl – Brought in sixty adults for a free lunch

– Half got 22 oz normal bowls;

half got 22 oz bottomless bowls

– Pressure-fed under the table, slowly refills

– What does this look like?

Wansink, Brian, James E. Painter, and Jill North (2005), “Bottomless

Bowls: Why Visual Cues of Portion Size May Influence Intake,” Obesity

Research,13:1 (January), 93-100. ©Wansink 2013

Would You Keep Eating

if Your Bowl Never Emptied?

Bowl is filled through this tube

This valve links soup

bowl to 6 quart pot

of hot soup




Bottomless Soup Bowls

Lead to Bottomless Appetites

• Results: – People kept eating; Ate 73% more until

stopping

– Yet, they didn’t think they ate more.

• Lesson: – Eye it, dish it, eat it

– Don’t rely only on stomach to tell us when we’re full -- it can “lie”

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

22 oz

Bowl

Bottom-

less

Oz Eaten

Oz Estimated




Eating Myth #3

“We Know What We Like”

©Wansink 2013

We Taste What We Think Well Taste

• Taste suggestibility & soy

– Soy vs. Textured Vegetable Protein vs. control

©Wansink 2013

“How Can You Make People Think Our Cafeteria’s Healthy Food Tastes Good?”

• Improve Perceptions of Cafeteria Food?

– Test Cafeteria -- Bevier Cafe

– Descriptive vs. non-descriptive labels

– 6 weeks: 6 products

– Self-selected

– Evaluations after dining

• Will there be a Benefit or a Backfire?

– Benefit --> Wow . . . I feel like I’m in Brussels!

– Backfire --> I’m disappointed …this is dry chocolate cake

Seafood filet

Chocolate Cake

Succulent Italian

Seafood filet

Belgium Black Forest

Chocolate Cake

Wansink, Brian, Koert van Ittersum, and James E. Painter (2005), “How

Descriptive Food Names Bias Sensory Perceptions in Restaurants,”

Food Quality and Preference, 16:5, 393-400. ©Wansink 2013

“People know what they like” --> Maybe Not

• We taste what we think we will taste -- descriptive foods “taste” better

– Better taste, better texture,

• Yummy name = yummy taste

– Must sound good to taste good

– Did the McLean sound good?

• Can changing names change taste

– Summer Camp study

– “Power peas” & “Rainforest smoothie”

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Descriptive

Label

Plain Label

Taste

Texture

Calories




http://www.ag.uiuc.edu/~food-lab/images/recipes_pic.gif

As Fine as North Dakota Wine • Spice Box Restaurant

– 117 diners; Pre Fix Meal --> $21 – Tonight only -- Free glass of wine! – SAME WINE but 2 labels

• Wine from California • Wine from North Dakota

– Post-meal measures • Wine & meal taste + consumption

• What will happen? – CA wine is usually good --> Halo Effect or – ND wine is actually better than I expected --> Positive Boomerang

North Dakota

Wine

California

Wine

Wansink, Brian, Koert van Ittersum, and James E. Painter (2005), “How Descriptive Food

Names Bias Sensory Perceptions in Restaurants,” Food Quality and Preference, 16:5, 393-400. ©Wansink 2013

I Wish They All Could be California Wines

• Wine Labels Influence Taste – Halo Effects

– Taste follows expectations

– Has a carry-over effect on food intake

– Oddly enough, buying the “wine with the ‘purdy’ label” might make sense

• Caveats – People of low to moderate expertise

• “Hey, some wise guy put a

cork in this wine bottle” (H.S.)

• Lots of cues influence expectations and make people think we are a better cook than we actually are . . .

– Lighting and music

– Plates and presentation

• The brownie study

0

12

34

56

78

California

Wine

Label

North

Dakota

Wine

Label

Wine Taste

Food Taste

"How Full?"

Post-Sensory Ratings




Momentous Problems & Household Solutions

Problems

• Our immediate environment

causes us to overeat

• Big plates

• Big bowls

• Wide glasses

• Eye-level foods

• Stockpiling & salience

Solutions

• Change our immediate

environment to eat less

• Smaller plates (10¼)

• Smaller bowls

• Narrow glasses

• Adjust eye-level foods

• Rearrange cupboards.

©Wansink 2013

Since Moving from Urbana-Champaign . . .

• 2005 -- Moved to Ithaca

– “Marketing Nutrition” (2005) and “Mindless Eating” (2006) came out

• 2007 -- Apptd as ExDir USDA’s Center for Nutri Pol & Promo

– Moved to DC

– Saw lots of fervent ideas & lots of impractical policy suggestions

• Dietary Guideline promotion

• School Lunches

• 2009 -- Returned to Cornell

– Started the Smarter Lunchroom Movement

– Cornell Center for Behavioral Economics in Child Nutrition Programs

©Wansink 2013

Part II.

The Smarter Lunchroom

Movement

©Wansink 2013

A Call from the NY State

Department of Health

• How much subsidize fruit in cafeterias to

increase whole fruit sales 5%?

©Wansink 2013

©Wansink 2013

“The problem’s not

the price?” • Two Suggestions:

– Put it in a nice bowl

– . . . in a well-lite place

• Results

– 5 Schools

– 1 School

– 2 Schools

©Wansink 2013

“The problem’s not

the price?” • Two Suggestions:

– Put it in a nice bowl

– . . . in a well-lite place

• Results

– 5 Schools

– 1 School

– 2 Schools

That’s obvious.

That’ll never work.

©Wansink 2013

Example 2: Corning (NY) Middle

School

• “Nobody buys salad.”

• Should we add more stuff or subsidize the

price?

©Wansink 2013

Ala Cart Items

Salad

Bar Hot Lunch

Line

Cash

Register

#1

Cash

Register

#2 ©Wansink 2013

Ala Cart Items

Hot Lunch

Line

Cash

Register

#1

Cash

Register

#2

Old

Location

for

Salad

Bar

New Location for

Salad Bar

©Wansink 2013

Ala Cart Items

Hot Lunch

Line

Cash

Register

#1

Cash

Register

#2

Old

Location

for

Salad

Bar

New Location for

Salad Bar

Daily Salad Sales

increased 200-300%

within two weeks

©Wansink 2013

Bigger Question . . .

• What are easy low-cost/no cost changes

schools can make to encourage healthy

choices?

• What can be done to . . .

– Increase the good stuff kids take

– Decrease the less good stuff kids take

– Increase overall participation in school

lunches

©Wansink 2013


Movement

©Wansink 2013

Let’s redesign a school lunchroom

for less than $50 . . .

©Wansink 2013

©Wansink 2013

1. Make it Visible

& “Appetizing

– Call from New York State Health Department

©Wansink 2013

©Wansink 2013

1. Make it Visible

& “Appetizing

• Sales & Price

• The Situation

• Put in nice bowl in well-lite location

– Sales increase 187% 1st 2 weeks

– Sales leveled at 105% for the rest of the

semester

©Wansink 2013

1. Make it Visible

& “Appetizing

This often works

against us if we

do it for the wrong

foods

Chocolate vs. white

milk .. .

©Wansink 2013

2. People Decide Sequentially

(Often Best to be 1st)

• Broccoli, Corn, Carrots

• Whatever’s 1st in line is

purchased 11% more often

than what’s 3rd

• Sequential (yes/no)

sometimes more common that

“Which one’s best”

– Chinese buffet

©Wansink 2013

3. People Want What

They Can See

• Ice cream (take it away = mutiny)

• Cover glass door with paper

– Sales decreased by 28%

• Many want what they see

– Exceptions = Heavy, frequent users

– “Ask about” vs. “Free”

©Wansink 2013

4. Upselling in 6 Words

• Pizza Line & Lettuce

• 25% vs. “Do you want salad with that? =

60%; A nice will-I-get-it” flair

©Wansink 2013

Tools You Can Use: Objectives

©Wansink 2013

Acti

on

Ite

ms

Objective A

Increasing the

number of

Students

that select

Fruit

Objective B

Increasing the

number of

Students

that select

Vegetables

Objective C

Increasing the

number of

Students that

select

White Milk

Objective D

Increasing the

number of

Students that

select

Targeted Entrée

Objective E

Increasing the

number of

Students that

select

Reimbursable

Meals

A

Display Fruit on

all lunch lines in

2 locations. 1

location should

be near the

register.

Give Vegetables

creative/descriptive

names and display

names next to or

with Vegetables

on the line

Place White Milk

first in the

lunchroom

coolers, in front of

sugar added

beverages.

Make the Entrée

with the greatest

nutrient density the

first or most

prominent in the

lunch line.

Place components of

RM at snack window.

Add an RM “grab and

go” bag to the window.

B

Display whole

Fruit in a bowl or

basket instead of

a stainless steel

bin or tray.

Display the age

targeted


names on posters or

menu boards

outside the

cafeteria.

Place White Milk

in every cooler in

the lunchroom

Give the Entrée an

age targeted


name and display it

with the

Targeted Entrée.

Move all “competitive

snack foods” (chips,

cookies, etc) behind

the serving counter in

the regular lunch line

so they are available

by request only.

C

Employ signs

and verbal

prompts to draw

attention to and

encourage kids

to buy Fruit.

Create a student

SNAC committee of

responsible for the

naming of and

signage for

Vegetables.

Make sure White

Milk accounts for

at least 1/3 of all

the Milk displayed

in lunchroom

coolers.

Display the new and


name on a placard

or menu board

outside the

cafeteria. (SNAC

Committee)

Create a “healthy

items” only

convenience line

stocked with all types

of milk, fruits, veggies,

grab & go sandwiches

& the lowest fat/lowest

sodium Entrée items.

©Wansink 2013

How’s a Smarter Lunchroom

Makeover Happen?

• Buy-in from Food Service Director

• One visit 30-40 photos

• Brainstorm changes (about 12 changes)

• Present changes to FSD to consider

• Implement changes

– 2/3 can be done overnight

– ½ about a week

– Average cost per lunchroom $34 ©Wansink 2013


Movement

• Goals

– End of 2011: Have 3000 US school rooms become

SmarterLunchrooms (at least 2 small low-cost/no

cost changes to lunchroom)

– End of 2012: 10,000 schools 2 small changes

– End of 2015: 30,000 schools SL makeover

©Wansink 2013

“3,000 to 30,000 schools” That’s crazy, how?

• Smarter Lunchroom

• E-ToolBox

– Targeted changes

– Case studies

– Simulations

– Demonstrations

• State SNAs

• USDA

• Major media outreach

• Train-the-Trainer

– Make Ext Pros the Go-to

Experts

– Arm with Toolbox

• 1. Direct makeovers

• 2. Seminars to FS

Directors

• Timeline

– Fall Partner counties

– 2012 NYC schools

– 2013 Greater NY

– 2014 US ©Wansink 2013

smarter lunchrooms movement: low-cost, no-cost...

Documents