Table 2. Selected potentially influencing variables on unplanned purchase behavior across weight status groups and energy density of the chosen foods.
| weight status (BMI) | |||
| normal weight (n = 58) | overweight/ obesity (n = 30) | ||
| potential influences | M (SD) | M (SD) | t(p) |
| time of unplanned purchase (in min) | 14.2 (8.9) | 15.1 (11.6) | -0.40 (0.694) |
| relative time of purchase | 0.6 (0.3) | 0.6 (0.3) | -0.85 (0.396) |
| unplanned purchase duration (in s) | 10.1 (6.3) | 10.9 (6.9) | -0.54 (0.590) |
| relative shelf height | 0.6 (0.3) | 0.6 (0.3) | 0.38 (0.709) |
| duration shopping trip (in min) | 26.2 (9.3) | 22.2 (9.3) | 1.91 (0.061) |
| pre hunger (10 cm VAS) | 3.1 (2.2) | 3.0 (2.3) | 0.11 (0.913) |
| n (in %) | n (in %) | Χ² (p) | |
| Cramer’s V/φ | |||
| with shopping companion | 4 (7) | 13 (43) | 14.6 (< .001) |
| 0.4 | |||
| accompanied by a child | 4(7) | 1(3) | 0.0 (0.843) |
| 0.0 | |||
| accompanied by a partner | 1 (2) | 13 (43) | 22.6 (< .001) |
| 0.5 | |||
| number of purchases made during shopping trip one | 28 (48) | 9 (30) | 2.0 (0.156) |
| 0.2 | |||
| energy density | |||
| LC (n = 51) | HC (n = 37) | ||
| potential influences | M (SD) | M (SD) | t(p) |
| time of unplanned purchase (in min) | 11.1 (9.0) | 19.2 (9.0) | -4.18 (<0.001) |
| relative time of purchase | 0.5 (0.3) | 0.7 (0.3) | -4.04 (<0.001) |
| unplanned purchase duration (in s) | 10.6 (6.3) | 10.2 (6.7) | 0.28 (0.780) |
| relative shelf height | 0.6 (0.3) | 0.6 (0.3) | 0.31 (0.756) |
| duration shopping trip (in min) | 23.2 (9.8) | 27.0 (8.4) | -1.95 (0.054) |
| pre hunger (10 cm VAS) | 3.4 (2.6) | 2.7 (2.1) | 1.36 (0.178) |
| n (in %) | n (in %) | Χ² (p) | |
| Cramer’s V/φ | |||
| with shopping companion | 12 (24) | 5 (14) | 0.8 (0.367) |
| 0.1 | |||
| accompanied by a child | 3 (6) | 2 (5) | 0.0 (1.000) |
| 0.0 | |||
| accompanied by a partner | 10 (20) | 4 (11) | 0.7 (0.413) |
| 0.1 | |||
| number of purchases made during shopping trip one | 23 (45) | 14 (38) | 0.2 (0.644) |
| 0.0 | |||
Note: Participants’ weight status was classified in participants with normal weight (18.5 < BMI < 25) and participants with overweight or obesity (BMI ≥ 25). Energy density of food was divided into low (LC < 260kcal/100g) and high (HC ≥ 260kcal/100g) energy density. Relative shelf height resulted from the relation between the shelf on which the product stands and the maximum number of shelves in the cabinet. VAS = visual analogue scale. Independent samples t-Tests (two-tailed) and Pearson’s Chi-squared test with Yates’ continuity correction are reported.