Table 3.
Adjusted* means of affordability characteristics, by racial segregation and corporate status, of surveyed stores (n 139) in Minneapolis and St. Paul, MN, USA, July–November 2014
| Racial segregation* | Corporate status* | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| White dominant | Racially mixed | POC dominant | Corporate/franchise | Independently owned | |||||||
| n † | Mean | 95 % CI | Mean | 95 % CI | Mean | 95 % CI | Mean | 95 % CI | Mean | 95 % CI | |
| Most offered fresh fruits | |||||||||||
| Bananas ($US/item) | 64 | 0·51 | 0·46, 0·55 | 0·45 | 0·41, 0·49 | 0·52 | 0·44, 0·61 | 0·55d | 0·50, 0·60 | 0·44e | 0·39, 0·49 |
| Apples ($US/item) | 56 | 0·92 | 0·83, 1·01 | 0·84 | 0·75, 0·93 | 0·83 | 0·67, 1·00 | 0·84 | 0·75, 0·92 | 0·89 | 0·80, 0·99 |
| Oranges ($US/item) | 47 | 0·94 | 0·76, 1·11 | 0·84 | 0·67, 1·01 | 1·25 | 1·00, 1·52 | 0·88 | 0·77, 0·99 | 0·92 | 0·80, 1·04 |
| Most offered fresh vegetables | |||||||||||
| Onions ($US/item) | 25 | 0·67 | 0·38, 0·96 | 0·70 | 0·41, 0·99 | 0·68 | 0·13, 1·22 | 0·79 | 0·28, 1·30 | 0·58 | 0·39, 0·77 |
| Tomatoes ($US/item) | 18 | 1·06 | 0·52, 1·60 | 1·30 | 0·68, 1·93 | 0·79 | 0·00, 1·60 | 1·32 | 0·48, 2·15 | 0·79 | 0·40, 1·18 |
| Lettuce ($US/item) | 15 | 3·31 | 2·71, 3·90 | 3·37 | 2·48, 4·27 | 3·21 | 1·47, 4·94 | 4·51d | 3·30, 5·73 | 2·08e | 1·44, 2·71 |
| Perceived difficulty to reduce pricing on healthier snacks (range: 1–5) | 73† | 3·5 | 3·0, 4·0 | 3·2 | 2·7, 3·8 | 3·8 | 3·0, 4·6 | 3·9d | 3·4, 4·4 | 3·1e | 2·7, 3·6 |
POC, people of colour.
Unlike superscript letters distinguish significant differences (P≤0·05) among corporate status categories (d,e). There were no significant differences among racial segregation categories.
*
Models are mutually adjusted for racial segregation and corporate status.
†
Sample size varies based on data source: either manager self-report survey data (dagger) or observational store data (no dagger); sample size for observational data also varies based on availability of produce in stores.