An interventional study of Menu design in Food Preferences, sponsored by University of Alabama at Birmingham. Completed. Open to participants aged 19 Years to 35 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2017-11-09.
Sponsored by University of Alabama at Birmingham · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other
Help build ClinicalTrials.gg — short surveys, remote interviews or testing, in your language. Take part →
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.
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).
155 studies on the registry are indexed under Food Preferences; 19 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 61 is below the median of 133 across 121 interventional studies indexed under Food Preferences.
Browse Food Preferences studies →University of Alabama at Birmingham is the lead sponsor of 1,421 studies on the registry; 277 are open to participants now.
Of its 164 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 130 (79%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Experiment 1
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Experiment 2
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
For the first experiment, subjects in this arm received the "easy" menu during the protocol.
Behavioral: Menu design
For the first experiment, subjects in this arm received the "hard" menu during the protocol.
Behavioral: Menu design
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
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.
Total Number of Items Ordered
Total number of items ordered off assigned menu
Time frame: During the 5-minute menu ordering task
Total Energy of Items ordered
Total Energy (kcals) of items ordered off assigned menu
Time frame: During the 5-minute menu ordering task
Subjective ratings of difficulty of using assigned menu to order a meal
Assessed by NASA Task Load Index questionnaire
Time frame: 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
Time frame: During the 5-minute menu ordering task
No study locations are listed for this record.
Plan to share: Yes — 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.
Supporting information: Informed consent form, Analytic code
Time frame: Materials will be posted after publication of study results.
Access criteria: Data and supporting materials will be freely available to anyone with access to openICPSR.
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Ran from Apr 2014 to primary completion in Mar 2015, 11 months.
Of 92 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Food Preferences, half reached primary completion within 5 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 1 and three quarters within 17. This study's 11 months is above that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 92 studies reached it within 5 months; a quarter within 1 and three quarters within 17.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2017. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University of Alabama at Birmingham →