Effects of Restaurant Menu Design on Food Ordering Outcomes

Effects of Menu Design on Psychophysiological Measures of Cognitive Load and Food Ordering Outcomes

High cognitive load activities can influence energy intake from food. It is unknown how restaurant menu designs may affect patrons in terms of cognitive demand and subsequent ordering of food.Objective: Our objective was to develop and experimentally test menu designs that differ in cognitive load to test the subjective and objective stress measures on food ordering.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Food Preferences
• Intervention / Treatment: Behavioral: Menu design

Detailed Description

For the first experiment, a parallel randomized trial of healthy young adults (n= 30) was conducted to compare ordering from one of two menu designs (easy - E, hard - H) developed in a prior pilot study. In the second experiment, restrained eaters were specifically recruited and asked to fast before the experiment to determine the influence of cognitive load of menus on energy ordered (n=31). Galvanic skin response was used as an objective proxy for relative cognitive load, and questionnaires were used to assess perceptions of the menus. The main outcomes were the number of items ordered and total energy of the items ordered (in kilocalories).

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 61
• Phase: Not Applicable

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 19 years to 35 years (Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Genders Eligible for Study: All

Description

Experiment 1

Inclusion Criteria:

• Normal vision or corrective lenses
• Normal hearing or a hearing aid
• A moderate level of English proficiency or greater
• Free from current food restrictions

Exclusion Criteria:

• Unwilling/uninterested in participation
• Currently taking any β-blocker medications
• Any serious skin conditions on the hands (because of galvanic skin sensors worn for the protocol)

Experiment 2

Inclusion Criteria:

• Normal vision or corrective lenses
• Normal hearing or a hearing aid
• A moderate level of English proficiency or greater
• Free from current food restrictions
• Qualifying as a restrained eater by the Cognitive Restraint scale on the Eating Inventory (score of 6 for men and 10 for women)

Exclusion Criteria:

• Unwilling/uninterested in participation
• Currently taking any β-blocker medications
• Any serious skin conditions on the hands (because of galvanic skin sensors worn for the protocol)

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Other
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: Single

Number of Arms

4

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Experiment 1 Easy; For the first experiment, subjects in this arm received the "easy" menu during the protocol.	Behavioral: Menu design; Participants were given 5 minutes to order a hypothetical meal from the assigned test menu by circling all items they wanted to order.
Active Comparator: Experiment 1 Hard; For the first experiment, subjects in this arm received the "hard" menu during the protocol.	Behavioral: Menu design; Participants were given 5 minutes to order a hypothetical meal from the assigned test menu by circling all items they wanted to order.
Active Comparator: Experiment 2 Easy; For the second experiment, subjects in this arm, who qualified as restrained eaters and were asked to fast for 8 hours overnight, received the "easy" menu during the protocol.	Behavioral: Menu design; Participants were given 5 minutes to order a hypothetical meal from the assigned test menu by circling all items they wanted to order.
Active Comparator: Experiment 2 Hard; For the second experiment, subjects in this arm, who qualified as restrained eaters and were asked to fast for 8 hours overnight, received the "hard" menu during the protocol.	Behavioral: Menu design; Participants were given 5 minutes to order a hypothetical meal from the assigned test menu by circling all items they wanted to order.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Total Number of Items Ordered	Total number of items ordered off assigned menu	During the 5-minute menu ordering task
Total Energy of Items ordered	Total Energy (kcals) of items ordered off assigned menu	During the 5-minute menu ordering task

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Subjective ratings of difficulty of using assigned menu to order a meal	Assessed by NASA Task Load Index questionnaire	Immediately (1 minute) following the 5-minute menu ordering period
Galvanic Skin Response	An objective proxy for relative cognitive load; this measure has been shown to be positively correlated with psychological stress or cognitive challenge as mediated by sympathetic nervous system activity	During the 5-minute menu ordering task

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: University of Alabama at Birmingham
• Collaborators: Texas Tech University
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: Kathryn A Kaiser, PhD, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Asst. Professor, Dept of Health Behavior

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): April 1, 2014
• Primary Completion (Actual): March 20, 2015
• Study Completion (Actual): March 20, 2015

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: October 18, 2017
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: November 6, 2017
• First Posted (Actual): November 9, 2017

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): November 9, 2017
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: November 6, 2017
• Last Verified: November 1, 2017

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: cognitive load; galvanic skin response; meal size; kilocalories; menu design
• Other Study ID Numbers: X140313004

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: YES
• IPD Plan Description: Pending approval by the University of Alabama at Birmingham's Institutional Review Board (IRB), which we have received for other studies and anticipate receiving here, we will prepare transportable de-identified raw databases and codebooks, which will contain the raw data used in any paper we publish from the proposed research. We will publically deposit such raw data for access by others without restriction in a public repository such as ICPSR. For any investigator requesting data we have not yet published, we will be glad to provide de-identified data and codebooks to the investigators provided that the proposed use does not conflict with our intentions for use.
• IPD Sharing Time Frame: Materials will be posted after publication of study results.
• IPD Sharing Access Criteria: Data and supporting materials will be freely available to anyone with access to openICPSR.
• IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type: ICF; ANALYTIC_CODE

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No