TABLE 1.
Results of 1-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for Demographic and Eating Behavior Variables of Participants Randomly Assigned to 3 Menu Label Conditions: New Haven, CT, 2007–2008
| No Calorie Label (n = 94), Mean (SD) | Calorie Label Only (n = 95), Mean (SD) | Calorie Label Plus Information (n = 104),Mean (SD) | d | F | P | |
| Age, y | 30.22 (12.54) | 29.60 (12.26) | 31.59 (12.48) | 2274 | 0.64 | .53 |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 25.46 (6.82) | 25.74 (6.43) | 24.38 (5.05) | 2276 | 1.34 | .26 |
| Hunger level before meala | 7.04 (2.53) | 7.54 (2.04) | 6.77 (2.46) | 2289 | 2.64 | .07 |
| Fullness after meala | 8.02 (1.85) | 7.93 (1.78) | 7.90 (1.93) | 2288 | 0.12 | .89 |
| Degree of liking meala | 6.20 (2.57) | 5.69 (2.45) | 5.87 (2.61) | 2286 | 0.99 | .38 |
| Frequency of visiting fast food restaurants, days | 2.24 (1.62) | 1.73 (1.58) | 2.23 (1.87) | 2289 | 2.76 | .07 |
| TFEQb | ||||||
| Restraint | 7.71 (4.73) | 7.88 (4.60) | 8.31 (5.14) | 2281 | 0.40 | .67 |
| Disinhibition | 5.52 (3.57) | 5.38 (3.03) | 5.05 (3.27) | 2282 | 0.52 | .60 |
| Hunger | 4.75 (3.01) | 4.85 (2.79) | 4.53 (2.95) | 2282 | 0.30 | .74 |
Note. BMI = body mass index (weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared); TFEQ = Three Factor Eating Questionnaire. No significant differences were observed between any of the menu type conditions.
a
Hunger and fullness levels and degree of liking of the study meal were all measured on continuous visual analogue scales ranging from 0 to 10.
b
The TFEQ restraint subscale is scored out of 21, the disinhibition subscale is scored out of 16, and the hunger subscale is scored out of 14.