This study aimed to test for racial/ethnic differences in perceived argument strength in favor of structural interventions to curb childhood obesity among lower-income parents of young children. Study participants were parents of children (age 0-5 years) with an annual income <$40,000, stratified by White, Black and/or Latinx race/ethnicity. Race/ethnicity was not a significant predictor of the perceived strength of a composite of marketing arguments, however it was a significant predictor of the perceived strength of tax arguments. Perceptions of strength of 12 of 35 discrete SSB tax arguments differed by race/ethnicity. Arguments regarding industry targeting of Black children, were particularly demonstrative of this difference. In contrast, arguments that these policies would provide support for parents were seen as strong arguments across groups. Findings suggest that Black and Hispanic/Latinx parents may be more prepared to move toward SSB policy support than white parents. Emphasizing community benefits of policy may be effective in moving constituents toward policy support across groups.
Published: July 2021
ID #: 76335
Journal: Am J Health Promot
Authors: Cannon JS, Farkouh EK, Winett LB, Dorfman L, Ramírez AS, Lazar S, Niederdeppe J
Effects of a front-of-package disclosure on accuracy in assessing children’s drink ingredients: two randomised controlled experiments with US caregivers of young childrenThis study aimed to test the effects of a standardized front-of-package (FOP) disclosure statement (indicating added sugar, non-nutritive sweetener (NNS) and juice content) on accuracy in assessing ingredients and perceived healthfulness of children’s drinks. In two randomized controlled experiments, the same participants (six hundred and forty-eight U.S. caregivers of young children ages 1-5 years) viewed More