The Application of Optimal Defaults to Improve Elementary School Lunch Selections: Proof of Concept.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we applied behavioral economics to optimize elementary school lunch choices via parent-driven decisions. Specifically, this experiment tested an optimal defaults paradigm, examining whether strategically manipulating the health value of a default menu could be co-opted to improve school-based lunch selections. METHODS: The design was a randomized comparison of optimal versus suboptimal (standard) default lunch menus for all first-graders in a school district for a period of 1 week. We hypothesized that making the default lunch option healthier, while providing parents the opportunity to access and choose from the standard school menu for their child, would yield more frequent selection of healthier items than when the default option was suboptimal. RESULTS: Overall, 127 (93%) first-grade children's families participated. Among those families randomized to receive the nutritionally optimized default menu, all but one remained with these options; of those parents randomized to the standard menu (suboptimal default), all parents remained with these options (Χ2 = 123.06, df = 1, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The mere positioning of choices, without restricting options, significantly affected which menu items the children received during the test period. Results are proof of concept for a strategy to increase health-promoting school lunch content, procedures, and policies.

The application of defaults to optimize parents' health-based choices for children.

Optimal defaults is a compelling model from behavioral economics and the psychology of human decision-making, designed to shape or "nudge" choices in a positive direction without fundamentally restricting options. The current study aimed to test the effectiveness of optimal (less obesogenic) defaults and parent empowerment priming on health-based decisions with parent-child (ages 3-8) dyads in a community-based setting. Two proof-of-concept experiments (one on breakfast food selections and one on activity choice) were conducted comparing the main and interactive effects of optimal versus suboptimal defaults, and parent empowerment priming versus neutral priming, on parents' health-related choices for their children. We hypothesized that in each experiment, making the default option more optimal will lead to more frequent health-oriented choices, and that priming parents to be the ultimate decision-makers on behalf of their child's health will potentiate this effect. Results show that in both studies, default condition, but not priming condition or the interaction between default and priming, significantly predicted choice (healthier vs. less healthy option). There was also a significant main effect for default condition (and no effect for priming condition or the interaction term) on the quantity of healthier food children consumed in the breakfast experiment. These pilot studies demonstrate that optimal defaults can be practicably implemented to improve parents' food and activity choices for young children. Results can inform policies and practices pertaining to obesogenic environmental factors in school, restaurant, and home environments.