Abstract
Is it possible to nudge consumers to swap their chicken sandwich for a meat substitute? A field study tests whether adapting the choice architecture of a large retail store increases the purchase of meat substitutes among nonusers. Instead of offering meat substitutes exclusively in a separate, vegetarian section, this study places them next to similar meat products in the butchery. As such, we (1) increase the meat substitutes’ visibility and (2) offer them in pairs with their meat-based counterparts. Doing so enhances sales of meat substitutes, relative to both past sales in the experimental store and sales in eight other control stores that serve as benchmarks. No backfire effect was observed as meat product sales did not increase significantly. A follow-up study disentangles the effect of product visibility and pairwise presentation. Both product visibility and pairwise presentation increase sales of meat substitutes. However, when visibility is high, fewer meat substitutes were sold in a pairwise presentation.
Generated Summary
This research investigates the effectiveness of choice architecture in nudging consumers toward meat substitutes within a retail environment. The study employs a field experiment and a subsequent lab study to explore how increasing the visibility of meat substitutes and pairing them with similar meat products affects consumer behavior. The central question is whether adapting the choice architecture of a large retail store can increase the purchase of meat substitutes among nonusers. The methodology includes a field study in a European retail store, comparing sales data during an intervention period with pre-intervention sales and sales in control stores. The study examines two nudges: (1) increasing the visibility of meat substitutes by placing them in the butchery alongside meat products and (2) placing meat substitutes in a pairwise presentation with their meat-based counterparts. The researchers also conducted a follow-up laboratory study to disentangle the effects of product visibility and pairwise presentation, using a 2×2 mixed-model design. The study aims to provide insights and practical implications for retailers seeking to encourage sustainable purchases, such as meat substitutes, and extend the understanding of consumer behavior in the context of food choices.
Key Findings & Statistics
- The experimental store sold more meat substitutes in the intervention period compared to the pre-intervention period, implying a 171% increase in sales (from 17 to 46 product sales).
- Meat product sales also increased slightly (+15%, from 149 to 171 product sales) in the intervention period.
- Sales of meat substitutes in the control stores decreased slightly (-8%) during the intervention versus the pre-intervention period.
- Meat product sales in the control stores increased slightly (+4%) during the intervention period.
- In the field experiment, the experimental store saw a 171% increase in meat substitute sales, (from 17 to 46 sales).
- In the field experiment, 72% of total meat substitute sales came from products placed pairwise in the butchery.
- During the pre-intervention period, 99 individuals bought one or more of the target products, whereas, 188 in the intervention period.
- In the eight control stores, 1122 individuals bought one (or more) of the target products during the pre-intervention period, while the number was 1554 during the intervention period.
- In study 1, the interaction effect between period and store was significant, t = 3.15, p = .002.
- In study 2, the main effect of visibility was significant; t(229) = 4.83, p < .001, d = 0.64.
- In study 2, the main effect of the pairwise presentation was significant, t(229) = 3.22, p = .001, d = 0.43.
- In study 2, the interaction effect between pairwise presentation and visibility was also significant; t(229) = -3.17, p = .002, d = 0.42.
- In study 2, the main effect of visibility on sales of the meat product was significant: Higher visibility led to increased sales, t(229) = 2.86, p = .005, d = 0.38.
- The effect of the pairwise presentation was not significant.
- Table 4: In the first condition, not pairwise, 1% of meat substitute (MS) sales, 18% of meat sales. In the second condition, not pairwise, 2% of MS sales, and 29% of meat sales. In the third condition, pairwise, 2% of MS sales, and 21% meat sales. In the fourth condition, pairwise, 2% of MS sales, 23% of meat sales.
Other Important Findings
- The study found that meat substitute sales were higher in the experimental store during the intervention period.
- The increase in meat substitute sales in the experimental store was likely a reflection of an altered purchase pattern of store customers.
- The sales of meat substitutes were higher in the experimental store during the intervention period compared to the eight control stores.
- Higher visibility led to more purchases of meat substitutes.
- Placing a meat substitute next to a similar meat product enhances sales of the former.
- The study’s findings support the idea that the visibility of products is key to increasing sales.
- The pairwise presentation was not significant.
Limitations Noted in the Document
- The study acknowledges that sales might have been influenced by environmental factors like competitor pricing.
- The study’s field experiment involved a limited number of stores.
- The study notes the difficulty of random allocation of customers to intervention or control conditions in the field experiment.
- The study’s findings do not include the long-term effectiveness of this choice architecture.
- The study recognizes that the meat substitute package carries a conspicuous “vegetarian” label, which may have influenced consumer choice.
Conclusion
The central finding of this research is that modifying choice architecture can significantly increase sales of meat substitutes. The study showed that offering a meat substitute next to a similar meat product in the butchery created an effective choice architecture that significantly increased sales of meat substitutes. The study provides more insights into the separate effects of product visibility and pairwise presentation. Product visibility proved to be crucial in increasing sales, and placing a meat substitute next to a similar meat product also enhanced sales. The study highlights that increasing shelf space is costly for manufacturers, so pairwise presentation offers a valuable positioning technique. In this research, the significant effect size of nudges on meat substitute sales in the field experiment, demonstrates the practical contribution of this study. The study’s external validity was strengthened by incorporating past sales data and sales in eight other control stores. The study notes that the intervention was rather small and could be further investigated for long-term effects. “Today, we rely on cows to turn plants into meat. There has to be a better way.” – Pat O. Brown, founder and CEO Impossible Foods.