Professional Documents
Culture Documents
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 18 September 2014
Received in revised form 17 May 2015
Accepted 6 June 2015
Available online 11 June 2015
Keywords:
Self-control
Ego-depletion
Heuristics
Social proof
Food choice
Field study
a b s t r a c t
Under low self-control conditions, people often favor tempting but unhealthy food products. Instead of
ghting against low self-control to reduce unhealthy food choices, we aim to demonstrate in a eld study
that heuristic decision tendencies can be exploited under these conditions. To do so a healthy product
was associated with a social proof heuristic, referring to the tendency to adopt the option preferred by
others. A healthy low-fat cheese was promoted with banners stating it was the most sold cheese in that
supermarket. A state of low self-control was experimentally induced in the supermarket, and compared
to a high self-control condition. Participants low in self-control were more likely to buy the low-fat
cheese, when this product was associated with the social proof heuristic, compared to when it was
not. This suggests that under low self-control conditions, presenting social proof cues may benet
healthy purchases.
2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
In todays Western obesogenic food environment, tempting
food products are abundantly available (French, Story, & Jeffery,
2001). People are confronted with palatable but unhealthy foods,
and persuasive food advertisements, at virtually every corner of
the street (French et al., 2001). Despite the introduction of healthier alternatives (e.g., light or low-fat food products), many people
purchase and consume unhealthy food products (Briefel &
Johnson, 2004; Nielsen, Siega-Riz, & Popkin, 2002). This makes
the question imperative of how food choices are actually made
and what potential exists to change behavior in the direction of
healthier alternatives at point-of-choice settings.
It is often suggested that people are more prone to succumbing
to unhealthy food choices when they are low in self-control, for
example when they are exposed to tempting snack foods at the
canteen after doing tedious tasks at work. Consequently, it is
assumed that in order to resist food temptations and act in line
with long term health goals, people need a sufcient level of
114
lab, providing more insight into the strength and robustness of the
ego-depletion effect. With this, our ndings add to the recent controversies surrounding the replicability of the ego-depletion phenomenon (Carter & McCullough, 2014; Hagger, Wood, Stiff, &
Chatzisarantis, 2010).
After an initial act of exerting self-control (e.g., such as doing
tedious tasks at work, making a range of choices, or inhibiting
impulses) people are less willing or able to exert self-control on
a secondary task, a phenomenon labeled ego-depletion
(Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Muraven, & Tice, 1998; Inzlicht &
Schmeichel, 2012; Muraven & Baumeister, 2000; Vohs et al.,
2008; but see for a critical note on the strength and robustness
of the ego-depletion effect Carter & McCullough, 2014; Dewitte,
Bruyneel, & Geyskens, 2009; Job, Dweck, & Walton, 2010; and
see for alternative mechanisms underlying the ego-depletion effect
Dang, Xiao, & Dewitte, 2014; Inzlicht & Schmeichel, 2012; Kurzban,
Duckworth, Kable, & Myers, 2013). Under conditions of
ego-depletion, people do not have enough resources or lack the
motivation to exert self-control over their behavior and decisions.
Consequently, people are unwilling or unable to weigh the pros
and cons of several options and make a deliberated decision.
Instead, decision-making becomes more swift, automatic, and
impulsive under these low self-control conditions (Fennis,
Janssen, & Vohs, 2009; Hofmann, Friese, & Strack, 2009; Janssen,
Fennis, Pruyn, & Vohs, 2008). People frequently favor tempting
but unhealthy food products under these conditions, as these are
often more appealing in the short term (Bruyneel, Dewitte, Vohs,
& Warlop, 2006; Vohs & Heatherton, 2000; Wang, Novemsky,
Dhar, & Baumeister, 2010).
Nevertheless, people are not doomed to make unhealthy food
choices. We suggest that people do not necessarily need to exert
self-control to make a healthy food choice under specic conditions. The impulsive choice under low self-control conditions can
become a healthy one, by associating the healthy option with a
heuristic (Salmon et al., 2014). Heuristics are simple decision rules
that simplify the decision making process, by excluding part of the
information, and hence save self-control resources (Gigerenzer &
Gaissmaier, 2011; Shah & Oppenheimer, 2008). A frequently used
heuristic is the social proof heuristic, referring to the tendency to
adopt the option preferred by others, which can be triggered by
presenting majority information on food products, like calling a
certain product the best-selling product, suggesting that many
people bought this product on previous occasions (Cialdini, 2009;
Lun, Sinclair, Whitchurch, & Glenn, 2007). Importantly, heuristics
are especially effective in inuencing behavior under conditions
of low self-control when people do not have the capacity or motivation to make a well-deliberated decision (Fennis et al., 2009;
Jacobson, Mortensen, & Cialdini, 2011; Salmon et al., 2014). For
instance, under low self-control conditions students chose to complete more extra surveys when a descriptive norm told them that
other students allegedly also completed extra surveys, compared
to under conditions of high self-control (inducing social proof;
Jacobson et al., 2011).
In the current obesogenic food environment, heuristics often
seem to favor unhealthy food choices. Whereas heuristics appear
to be a well-known strategy for the promotion of palatable,
unhealthy foods, they seem to be rarely associated with healthy
food products. Up till now, healthy products are often promoted
in conscious, deliberate ways, in which for instance the healthiness
of a product is emphasized, thereby relying on deliberate decision
making and self-control resources at the moment of making a food
choice (e.g., Bandura, 2004; Conner, Norman, & Bell, 2002). In
point-of-purchase settings, the healthiness and health benets of
products are often emphasized by the use of health and nutrition
claims (Kozup, Creyer, & Burton, 2003; Sloan, 2008; Urala,
Schutz, & Spinks, 2011). Yet, these conscious, deliberate attempts
115
116
Table 1
Descriptive statistics per condition.
No heuristicno depletion
No heuristicdepletion
Heuristicno depletion
Heuristicdepletion
41
18.4% men
(3 missings)
49.24
(SD = 9.38)
(4 missings)
10.50%
(3 missings)
36.90%
52.60%
5.76 (SD = .75)
(3 missings)
95.10%
73.20%
75.60%
26.30%
(3 missings)
4.07 (SD = 1.42)
4.20 (SD = 1.50)
3.22 (SD = 1.64)
32
30% men
(2 missings)
52.7
(SD = 13.12)
(2 missings)
10%
(2 missings)
26.70%
63.30%
5.50 (SD = 1.17)
(2 missings)
96.90%
62.50%
71%
13.30%
(2 missings)
4.34 (SD = 1.56)
4.22 (SD = 1.77)
3.25 (SD = 1.59)
28
32% men
(3 missings)
53.26
(SD = 10.95)
(3 missings)
16%
(3 missings)
40%
44%
5.72 (SD = 1.06)
(3 missings)
92.90%
57.10%
60.70%
32%
(3 missings)
3.68 (SD = 1.42)
5.00 (SD = 1.63)
2.57 (SD = 1.26)
65%
(1 missing)
19.50%
26
37.5% men
(2 missings)
46.33
(SD = 9.31)
(2 missings)
4.20%
(2 missings)
20.80%
75%
5.58 (SD = 1.10)
(2 missings)
88.50%
53.80%
73.10%
4.20%
(2 missings)
3.69 (SD = 1.69)
4.62 (SD = 1.44)
2.64 (SD = 1.18)
(4 missings)
3.16 (SD = 1.95)
(1 missing)
66.70%
(5 missings)
7.70%
67.70%
(1 missing)
12.50%
66.70%
(1 missing)
28.60%
N
Gender
Age
Low education
Middle education
High education
Healthy eating goal
Habitual supermarket
Shopping list
Alone (versus with others)
Worked that day
117
118
119
120
Fennis, B. M., Janssen, L., & Vohs, K. D. (2009). Acts of benevolence: A limitedresource account of compliance with charitable requests. Journal of Consumer
Research, 35, 906924. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/593291.
Finkelstein, S. R., & Fishbach, A. (2010). When healthy food makes you
hungry. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 357367. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1086/652248.
French, S. A., Story, M., & Jeffery, R. W. (2001). Environmental inuences on eating
and physical activity. Annual Review of Public Health, 22, 309335. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.22.1.309.
Gigerenzer, G., & Gaissmaier, W. (2011). Heuristic decision making. Annual Review of
Psychology, 62, 451482. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120709145346.
Goldstein, N. J., Cialdini, R. B., & Griskevicius, V. (2008). A room with a viewpoint:
Using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. Journal of
Consumer Research, 35, 472482. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/586910.
Hagger, M. S., Wood, C., Stiff, C., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. D. (2010). Ego depletion and
the strength model of self-control: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136,
495525. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019486.
Herman, C. P., & Polivy, J. (2011). The self-regulation of eating: Theoretical and
practical problems. In K. D. Vohs & R. F. Baumeister (Eds.), Handbook of selfregulation: Research, theory and applications (pp. 522536). New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
Hofmann, W., Friese, M., & Strack, F. (2009). Impulse and self-control from a dualsystems perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 162176. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01116.x.
Hofmann, W., Friese, M., & Wiers, R. W. (2008). Impulsive versus reective
inuences on health behavior: A theoretical framework and empirical review.
Health Psychology Review, 2, 111137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/174371908
02617668.
Hsieh, F. Y. (1989). Sample size tables for logistic regression. Statistics in Medicine, 8,
795802.
Inzlicht, M., & Schmeichel, B. J. (2012). What is ego-depletion? Toward a
mechanistic revision of the resource model of self-control. Perspectives on
Psychological Science, 7, 450463. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1745691612
454134.
Inzlicht, M., Schmeichel, B. J., & Macrae, C. N. (2014). Why self-control seems (but
may not be) limited. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 127133. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.tics.2013.12.009.
Jacobson, R. P., Mortensen, C. R., & Cialdini, R. B. (2011). Bodies obliged and
unbound: Differentiated response tendencies for injunctive and descriptive
social norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 433448. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0021470.
Janssen, L., Fennis, B. M., & Pruyn, A. T. H. (2010). Forewarned is forearmed:
Conserving self-control strength to resist social inuence. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 911921. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jesp.2010.06.008.
Janssen, L., Fennis, B. M., Pruyn, A. T. H., & Vohs, K. D. (2008). The path of least
resistance: Regulatory resource depletion and the effectiveness of social
inuence techniques. Journal of Business Research, 61, 10411045. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.09.013.
Job, V., Dweck, C. S., & Walton, G. M. (2010). Ego-depletion- is it all in your head?
Implicit theories about willpower affect self-regulation. Psychological Science,
21, 16861693. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797610384745.
Kozup, J. C., Creyer, E. H., & Burton, S. (2003). Making healthful food choices: The
inuence of health claims and nutrition information on consumers evaluations
of packaged food products and restaurant menu items. Journal of Marketing, 67,
1934. http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.67.2.19.18608.
Kurzban, R., Duckworth, A., Kable, J. W., & Myers, J. (2013). An opportunity cost
model of subjective effort and task performance. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
36, 661679. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12003196.
Laran, J., & Janiszewski, C. (2011). Work or fun? How task construal and completion
inuence regulatory behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 967983.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/656576.
Lun, J., Sinclair, S., Whitchurch, E. R., & Glenn, C. (2007). (Why) do I think what you
think? Epistemic social tuning and implicit prejudice. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 93, 957972. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.6.957.
Maas, J., De Ridder, D. T. D., De Vet, E., & De Wit, J. B. F. (2012). Do distant foods
decrease intake? The effect of food accessibility on consumption. Psychology &
Health, 27, 5973. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2011.565341.
Mann, T., & Ward, A. (2004). To eat or not to eat: Implications of the attentional
myopia model for restrained eaters. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 113, 9098.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021- 843X.113.1.90.
Michie, S., Abraham, C., Whittington, C., McAteer, J., & Gupta, S. (2009). Effective
techniques in healthy eating and physical activity interventions: A metaregression. Health Psychology, 28, 690701. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
a0016136.
Muehlhoff, E., Bennett, A., & McMahon, D. (2013). Milk and dairy products in human
nutrition. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Muraven, M., & Baumeister, R. F. (2000). Self-Regulation and depletion of limited
resources: Does self-control resemble a muscle? Psychological Bulletin, 126,
247259. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.2.247.
Muraven, M., & Slessareva, E. (2003). Mechanisms of self-control failure: Motivation
and limited resources. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 894906.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167203029007008.
Neal, D. T., Wood, W., & Drolet, A. (2013). How do people adhere to goals when
willpower is low? The prots (and pitfalls) of strong habits. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 959975. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
a0032626.
Nielsen, S. J., Siega-Riz, A. M., & Popkin, B. M. (2002). Trends in food locations and
sources among adolescents and young adults. Preventive Medicine, 35, 107113.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/pmed.2002.1037.
Parker, J. R., & Lehmann, D. R. (2011). When shelf-based scarcity impacts consumer
preferences. Journal of Retailing, 87, 142155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jretai.2011.02.001.
Prinsen, S., De Ridder, D. T. D., & De Vet, E. (2013). Eating by example. Effects of
environmental cues on dietary decisions. Appetite, 70, 15. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.appet.2013.05.023.
Salmon, S. J., Fennis, B. M., de Ridder, D. T. D., Adriaanse, M. A., & de Vet, E. (2014).
Health on impulse: When low self-control promotes healthy food choices.
Health Psychology, 33, 103109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0031785.
Schwarzer, R. (2008). Modeling health behavior change: How to predict and modify
the adoption and maintenance of health behaviors. Applied Psychology, 57, 129.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2007.00325.x.
Shah, A. K., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2008). Heuristics made easy: An effort-reduction
framework. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 207222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
0033-2909.134.2.207.
Sloan, E. (2008). The top 10 functional food trends. Food Technology, 4, 2544.
Temminghoff, M., & Paulussen, K. (2012). Onderzoek naar Light eten [PowerPoint
slides]. Retrieved from <http://www.voedingscentrum.nl/Assets/Uploads/
Documents/Professionals/Voedingscentrum_quickscan_light-10-12.pptx>.
Urala, N., Schutz, H., & Spinks, J. (2011). Consumer perceptions of Functional Food
in the United States. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 17, 407419.
Vohs, K. D., Baumeister, R. F., Schmeichel, B. J., Twenge, J. M., Nelson, N. M., & Tice, D.
M. (2008). Making choices impairs subsequent self-control: A limited resource
account of decision making, self-regulation, and active initiative. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 883898. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/00223514.94.5.883.
Vohs, K. D., & Heatherton, T. F. (2000). Self-regulatory failure: A resource-depletion
approach. Psychological Science, 11, 249254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/14679280.00250.
Wang, J., Novemsky, N., Dhar, R., & Baumeister, R. F. (2010). Trade-offs and depletion
in choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 47, 910919. http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/
jmkr.47.5.910.
Wansink, B., & Sobal, J. (2007). Mindless eating: The 200 daily food decisions we
overlook. Environment and Behavior, 39, 106123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
0013916506295573.