↓ Skip to main content

Effects of plain packaging, warning labels, and taxes on young people’s predicted sugar-sweetened beverage preferences: an experimental study

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
57 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
212 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effects of plain packaging, warning labels, and taxes on young people’s predicted sugar-sweetened beverage preferences: an experimental study
Published in
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12966-016-0421-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tessa Bollard, Ninya Maubach, Natalie Walker, Cliona Ni Mhurchu

Abstract

Consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) is associated with increased risk of obesity, diabetes, heart disease and dental caries. Our aim was to assess the effects of plain packaging, warning labels, and a 20 % tax on predicted SSB preferences, beliefs and purchase probabilities amongst young people. A 2 × 3 × 2 between-group experimental study was conducted over a one-week period in August 2014. Intervention scenarios were delivered, and outcome data collected, via an anonymous online survey. Participants were 604 New Zealand young people aged 13-24 years who consumed soft drinks regularly. Participants were randomly allocated using a computer-generated algorithm to view one of 12 experimental conditions, specifically images of branded versus plain packaged SSBs, with either no warning, a text warning, or a graphic warning, and with or without a 20 % tax. Participant perceptions of the allocated SSB product and of those who might consume the product were measured using seven-point Likert scales. Purchase probabilities were measured using 11-point Juster scales. Six hundred and four young people completed the survey (51 % female, mean age 18 (SD 3.4) years). All three intervention scenarios had a significant negative effect on preferences for SSBs (plain packaging: F (6, 587) = 54.4, p <0.001; warning label: F (6, 588) = 19.8, p <0.001; 20 % tax: F (6, 587) = 11.3, p <0.001). Plain packaging and warning labels also had a significant negative impact on reported likelihood of purchasing SSB's (p = <0.001). A 20 % tax reduced participants' purchase probability but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.2). Plain packaging and warning labels significantly reduce young people's predicted preferences for, and reported probability of purchasing, SSBs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 57 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 212 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Czechia 1 <1%
Unknown 211 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 44 21%
Student > Bachelor 42 20%
Researcher 23 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 10%
Student > Postgraduate 11 5%
Other 40 19%
Unknown 31 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 34 16%
Social Sciences 24 11%
Psychology 23 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 6%
Other 39 18%
Unknown 38 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 98. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 June 2019.
All research outputs
#220,751
of 15,918,484 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#61
of 1,564 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,740
of 266,474 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#1
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,918,484 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,564 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,474 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them