Recently in the sister blog

Echelbarger et al. write:

Across three studies, we examine the variety selections of 329 children (4–9 years of age) and 81 adults in the food domain. In studies 1 and 2, we find that, like adults, children prefer to diversify their selections given no established preference for one item over another. In study 3, we find that children (4–9 years) diversify their selections more and choose more healthy options when choosing items simultaneously (all on one day) versus sequentially (across several days). Together, our results provide novel insight into the potential for variety to serve as a tool to promote greater well-being in childhood.

This article, “Children’s variety seeking in food choices,” might be interesting to those of you whose only exposure to food-choice research is the work of Brian Wansink.

I’m not so happy with the graphs and the summaries of results using statistical significance, but I like the general approach of using psychology experiments to try to understand things rather than as a way to validate quick fixes.

3 thoughts on “Recently in the sister blog

  1. Hmm.

    “In study 3, we find that children (4–9 years) diversify their selections more and choose more healthy options when choosing items simultaneously (all on one day) versus sequentially (across several days).”

    Isn’t this just more Wansink? Desperately searching for a magic nudge to improve behavior? Sure, if you blast kids with lots of choices at they same time, they’ll pick the stuff they like and then one or two other things, but it’s still magic nudging. It might even work (well enough to get a paper that won’t get retracted), but it may be just a poor alternative to not buying bad food in the first place…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.