IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaeafe/123388.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Total Lunchroom Makeovers: Using the Principle of Asymmetric Paternalism to Address New School Lunchroom Guidelines

Author

Listed:
  • Hanks, Andrew S.
  • Just, David R.
  • Wansink, Brian

Abstract

A key goal of the Healthy, Hungry-Free Kids Act of 2010 is to ensure that children have access to healthy foods in schools. While the new policy mandates that healthy items must be included on the lunch line—and even that children must take certain foods—there is concern both over whether children will choose to eat the healthier fare, and what the ultimate cost may be to schools that comply. We propose a series of behavioral nudges–the total lunchroom makeover–that may help lead children to make healthier choices at little cost the schools in accordance with the goals of the new legislation.. We report the results from a field experiment in which a series of nudges lead to significant increases in the consumption of fruits and vegetables—a substantive step in the right direction.

Suggested Citation

  • Hanks, Andrew S. & Just, David R. & Wansink, Brian, 2012. "Total Lunchroom Makeovers: Using the Principle of Asymmetric Paternalism to Address New School Lunchroom Guidelines," 2012 AAEA/EAAE Food Environment Symposium 123388, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaeafe:123388
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.123388
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/123388/files/Hanks_TotalLunchroomMakeovers.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.123388?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    2. David C. Wyld, 2010. "ASecond Lifefor organizations?: managing in the new, virtual world," Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 33(6), pages 529-562, May.
    3. John A. List, 2011. "Why Economists Should Conduct Field Experiments and 14 Tips for Pulling One Off," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(3), pages 3-16, Summer.
    4. Just, David R. & Wansink, Brian, 2009. "Smarter Lunchrooms: Using Behavioral Economics to Improve Meal Selection," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 24(3), pages 1-7.
    5. Turley, L. W. & Milliman, Ronald E., 2000. "Atmospheric Effects on Shopping Behavior: A Review of the Experimental Evidence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 193-211, August.
    6. Levitt, Steven D. & List, John A., 2009. "Field experiments in economics: The past, the present, and the future," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 1-18, January.
    7. List, John A., 2009. "An introduction to field experiments in economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 439-442, June.
    8. repec:feb:artefa:0110 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. List, John A. & Rasul, Imran, 2011. "Field Experiments in Labor Economics," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 2, pages 103-228, Elsevier.
    10. repec:feb:artefa:0090 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Cairns, John & van der Pol, Marjon, 2000. "Valuing future private and social benefits: The discounted utility model versus hyperbolic discounting models," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 191-205, April.
    12. Brian E. Roe & David R. Just, 2009. "Internal and External Validity in Economics Research: Tradeoffs between Experiments, Field Experiments, Natural Experiments, and Field Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1266-1271.
    13. Massara, Francesco & Liu, Sandra S. & Melara, Robert D., 2010. "Adapting to a retail environment: Modeling consumer-environment interactions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(7), pages 673-681, July.
    14. Joshua P. Berning & Hayley H. Chouinard & Jill J. McCluskey, 2010. "Do Positive Nutrition Shelf Labels Affect Consumer Behavior? Findings from a Field Experiment with Scanner Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(2), pages 364-369.
    15. repec:feb:artefa:0089 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hanks, Andrew S. & Just, David R. & Wansink, Brian, 2012. "Trigger Foods: The Influence of “Irrelevant” Alternatives in School Lunchrooms," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 41(01), pages 1-10, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John A. List, 2014. "Using Field Experiments to Change the Template of How We Teach Economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(2), pages 81-89, June.
    2. Matteo M. Galizzi & Daniel Navarro-Martinez, 2019. "On the External Validity of Social Preference Games: A Systematic Lab-Field Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 976-1002, March.
    3. Bordunos, A. & Kokoulina, L. & Ermolaeva, L., 2015. "Role of enterprise gamified system in fostering innovation capacity: A field experiment," Working Papers 6420, Graduate School of Management, St. Petersburg State University.
    4. Carroll, Kathryn A. & Samek, Anya, 2018. "Field experiments on food choice in grocery stores: A ‘how-to’ guide," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 331-340.
    5. Rainer Eppel & Helmut Mahringer, 2021. "Die Effekte einer intensivierten Betreuung geringqualifizierter Jugendlicher mit Mindestsicherungsbezug. Evidenz aus der experimentellen Einführung eines Fallmanagements im Arbeitsmarktservice Wien," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 67022.
    6. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2009. "Can Field Experiments Return Agricultural Economics to the Glory Days?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1259-1265.
    7. Guido Friebel & Matthias Heinz & Miriam Krueger & Nikolay Zubanov, 2017. "Team Incentives and Performance: Evidence from a Retail Chain," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(8), pages 2168-2203, August.
    8. Christiane Bradler & Robert Dur & Susanne Neckermann & Arjan Non, 2013. "Employee Recognition and Performance: A Field Experiment," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 13-038/VII, Tinbergen Institute.
    9. Oriana Bandiera & Iwan Barankay & Imran Rasul, 2011. "Field Experiments with Firms," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(3), pages 63-82, Summer.
    10. Hallsworth, Michael & List, John A. & Metcalfe, Robert D. & Vlaev, Ivo, 2017. "The behavioralist as tax collector: Using natural field experiments to enhance tax compliance," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 14-31.
    11. Rudolf Kerschbamer & Daniel Neururer & Matthias Sutter, 2019. "Credence goods markets and the informational value of new media: A natural field experiment," Working Papers 2019-02, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    12. Brosig-Koch, Jeannette & Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Kairies-Schwarz, Nadja & Wiesen, Daniel, 2016. "Using artefactual field and lab experiments to investigate how fee-for-service and capitation affect medical service provision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PB), pages 17-23.
    13. Henk Folmer & Olof Johansson-Stenman, 2011. "Does Environmental Economics Produce Aeroplanes Without Engines? On the Need for an Environmental Social Science," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(3), pages 337-361, March.
    14. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John List, 2013. "On the Generalizability of Experimental Results in Economics: With A Response To Camerer," Artefactual Field Experiments j0001, The Field Experiments Website.
    15. Buchholz, Matthias & Holst, Gesa & Musshoff, Oliver, 2015. "Water and irrigation policy impact assessment using business simulation games: evidence from northern Germany," Department of Agricultural and Rural Development (DARE) Discussion Papers 260781, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    16. Goto, Jun & Sawada, Yasuyuki & Aida, Takeshi & Aoyagi, Keitaro, 2015. "Incentives and Social Preferences: Experimental Evidence from a Seemingly Inefficienct Traditional Labor Contract," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211687, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Eric Floyd & John A. List, 2016. "Using Field Experiments in Accounting and Finance," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2), pages 437-475, May.
    18. Verena Tiefenbeck & Lorenz Goette & Kathrin Degen & Vojkan Tasic & Elgar Fleisch & Rafael Lalive & Thorsten Staake, 2018. "Overcoming Salience Bias: How Real-Time Feedback Fosters Resource Conservation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 1458-1476, March.
    19. Jonathan H.W. Tan & Zhao Zichen & Daniel John Zizzo, 2023. "Scientific Inference from Field and Laboratory Economic Experiments: Empirical Evidence," Discussion Papers Series 663, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    20. Messer, Dolores & Wolter, Stefan C., 2009. "Money Matters: Evidence from a Large-Scale Randomized Field Experiment with Vouchers for Adult Training," IZA Discussion Papers 4017, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaeafe:123388. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.