Table 2.

Ratings of the unhealthy food sponsor product and the healthier food sponsor product, by sponsorship condition, among students in grades 1 to 3 (aged 5–10 years; n 1124) from schools in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia, May–August 2016

	Sponsorship condition
	Non-food branding (control)		Unhealthy food branding		Healthier food branding		Obesity prevention campaign branding
	Mean	sd	Mean	sd	Mean	sd	Mean	sd
Unhealthy food sponsor product
Liking of product	3·86	1·40	3·80	1·44	3·73	1·41	3·84	1·38
Product taste	4·01	1·31	3·98	1·30	3·91	1·31	4·00	1·30
Healthiness of product	2·61	1·34	2·62	1·36	2·59	1·35	2·56	1·34
Ask parents for product	3·49	1·49	3·39	1·50	3·42	1·49	3·44	1·48
Feel if parents bought product	3·90	1·33	3·90	1·32	3·74	1·33	3·85	1·31
Healthier food sponsor product
Liking of product	3·57	1·45	3·58	1·48	3·48	1·54	3·50	1·52
Product taste	3·67	1·35	3·69	1·36	3·67	1·38	3·70	1·44
Healthiness of product	4·06	1·05	4·12	1·06	4·03	1·06	4·17	1·00
Ask parents for product	3·43	1·48	3·42	1·48	3·42	1·46	3·41	1·50
Feel if parents bought product	3·60	1·38	3·64	1·40	3·63	1·40	3·56	1·42

No significant differences in mean ratings were found between the non-food branding condition and the unhealthy, healthier and obesity prevention campaign branding conditions, respectively (all P>0·05).