This content analysis examines the arguments used to support or oppose the USDA’s proposed rule that all SNAP-authorized retailers carry more nutritious foods. A random sample of public comments posted to the U.S. Federal Register was analyzed. Three main themes were discussed throughout the comments: 1) arguments used in opposition to the rule; 2) arguments used in support of the rule; and 3) facilitators to assist the stores in implementing the rule. This study’s findings could help guide rule implementation by understanding the viewpoints of stakeholder’s that would be impacted by the policy change.
Arguments Used in Public Comments to Support or Oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Minimum Stocking Requirements: A Content Analysis
The purpose of this project is to examine rural store owners’ perceptions about the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) proposed rule that updates the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) vendor requirements and to understand the barriers and facilitators to implementation. The study will include a content analysis on the … More
This study seeks to develop and test the impact of “nudges” in an online grocery store on purchases of fruit drinks and healthier substitutes among a sample of low-income parents of children ages 1-5 years. The goal of this project is to reduce fruit drink intake among low-income children, including … More
Changes in Beverage Availability and Targeted Marketing Associated with the Philadelphia Beverage Tax
The goal of this study is to provide much needed scientific evidence about whether the Philadelphia beverage tax is associate with changes in beverage availability and targeted marketing, with a focus on drinks commonly consumed by children ages 0-5 and Black and Latinx households with young children. Specific aims include: … More