Karen Glanz, PhD, MPH University of Pennsylvania

1. In-Store Food Marketing Research Innovative strategies to market healthier foods and de-market junk foods Karen Glanz, PhD, MPH University of Pennsylvania

2. In-Store Food Marketing • Deserves attention as a unique focus – distinct from media marketing, digital marketing, and package labeling • Shoppers/buyers are usually adults, but they are often influenced by children

3. Significant Research Gaps • Little research on children • related to IN-STORE marketing • Lack of representation of diverse • population groups • (race/ethnicity, income, education) • Limited research on consumer • behavior & health in real-life • settings

4. Conceptual Framework: Marketing  the 4 P’s • Price:coupons, specials, private label/store brands • * Promotion:In-store vs. out-of-store; signage; banners; taste-testing; shopper marketing”; single- vs. cross-brand promotion; store nutrition guidance systems • * Placement:Location of products in store; influence of assortments (quantity and variety); placement on shelves; quantity of facings/shelf-space; store layout • Products:Nutrient composition; packaging; health claims; targeting markets; effects of color and naming • * Most robust in-store marketing intervention opportunities

5. GOAL: evaluate impact of in-store marketing strategies to… Increase sales of healthy children’s foods Decrease sales of empty calories from energy-dense, low-nutrient children’s foods Be profitable or cost-neutral to retailers/manufacturers Improve customer satisfaction & loyalty Pilot test observational measure: Grocery Marketing Environment Assessment Pilot Study in progress (The Food Trust, U of Penna, Temple University)

6. Product Category Focus • Known role in excess weight or weight gain prevention • Nutritional content{CALORIES}varies within category • Child-relevant • Strong brand competition • Potential to be revenue-neutral for retailers • Can increase healthy, decrease unhealthy, • and/or shift the balance • Cereal • Milk • Beverages (SSB/0-calorie) • Salty snacks • Frozen entrees • Frozen dairy desserts • Canned pasta • Frozen entrees • Healthy check-out aisles

7. Review previous sales data (select products) Consumer focus groups Design interventions Randomize stores (4 tx, 4 control) Implement interventions 4-6 months MEASURES Weekly sales data, 1 yr pre, weekly, post-intvn Intercept interviews Observations Grocery Marketing Environment Assessment pre-post Study Phases & Design

8.  MEASUREMENT • Needed! Feasible measures of the • 4 P’s for in-store food retail • environments (measures exist for products) • Separate dimensions (e.g., placement, promotion) • Composite ‘scores’ to prompt and evaluate change • Maximize objectivity (e.g., use sales data) • Clear, feasible, reliable, disseminable

9. FIRST-GENERATION MEASURES • GroPromo (Kerr, Sallis, Bromby & Glanz; in review 2011) • Measures placement and promotion for several categories of foods • Studied in 3 neighborhoods in San Diego • Good inter-rater reliability • Discriminant validity • Criterion validity (compared to customer receipts) Health Responsibility Index (Dibbs/NCC, 2004 in UK) • Nutritional content of store brand (sodium, fat, sugar) Labeling information • In-store promotions (shelf space, less healthy snacks @ checkouts Customer information & advice • Overall Score

10. Research Methods • Balance between internal & external validity • Controlled experiments • Advantages:determine causal effects, manipulate • variables of interest • Disadvantages: if done in lab settings they may • differ from real-life situations • Field studies & natural experiments • Advantages: closer estimate of real-world • effects • Disadvantages: expensive, hard to control • external factors & events

11. Design Approaches (micro to macro) • “Micro” includes laboratory experiments, often not in real-world settings • “Meso” includes analogue stores, with experiments and/or observation • “Macro” is in real-world settings, ideally sustainable

12. Balancing pros & cons: Controlled experiments in real store settings • Uses advantages of previous two approaches • Where industry-researcher partnerships have • the most potential payoff • From a public health perspective • Maximizes scientific rigor + real-world applicability • Can build on controlled/lab experiments • Better chance of dissemination & • sustainability over time

13. Issues to considerand Opportunities to use Will need to tackle the unhealthy options Brand-based vs. health-based marketing Loyalty card users Slotting allowances Displays and signage – in-store triggers Audio and shopping-cart displays Information: on-packages and elsewhere

14. Challenges Working together – supermarkets (want people to buy more) and public health researchers (want people to buy less of common products) Consumer price and value sensitivity (wanting more food for their money) Defining ‘categories’ for sales data isn’t as easy as it seems Balancing industry’s profit motive, consumer desire for value, & health experts’ goal to reducing childhood obesity

15. Acknowledgments/Collaborators University of Pennsylvania Karen Glanz Erica Davis The Food Trust Allison Karpyn Stephanie Weiss Temple University Gary Foster Alexis Wojtanowski Collaborating Grocers Brown’s ShopRite Fresh Grocer Funding: RWJF, HER, USDA

16. ”An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure” - Ben Franklin Thank you!