A Brief Motivational Intervention Differentially Reduces Sugar-sweetened Beverage (SSB) Consumption

Ashley E. Mason · Laura Anne Schmidt · Laura Ishkanian · Laurie M. Jacobs · Cindy W. Leung · Leeane Jensen +6 more

13 citations0/0 files storedAnnals of Behavioral Medicine

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Behavioral Health and Interventions Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Environmental and behavioral interventions hold promise to reduce sugar-sweetened beverage (SSBs) consumption. PURPOSE: To test, among frequent SSB consumers, whether motivations to consume SSBs moderated the effects of (a) a workplace SSB sales ban (environmental intervention) alone, and (b) a "brief motivational intervention" (BI) in addition to the sales ban, on changes in SSB consumption. METHODS: We assessed whether (1) baseline motivations to consume SSBs (craving, psychological stress, or taste enjoyment) impacted changes in daily SSB consumption at 6-month follow-up among frequent (>12oz of SSBs/day) SSB consumers (N = 214); (2) participants randomized to the BI (n = 109) versus to the sales ban only (n = 105) reported greater reductions in SSB consumption at follow-up; and (3) motivations to consume SSBs moderated any changes in SSB consumption. RESULTS: In response to the sales ban alone, individuals with stronger SSB cravings (+1 SD) at baseline showed significantly smaller reductions in daily SSB consumption at 6-month follow-up relative to individuals with weaker (-1 SD) SSB cravings (2.5 oz vs. 22.5 oz), p < .01. Receiving the BI significantly increased reductions for those with stronger SSB cravings: Among individuals with stronger cravings, those who received the BI evidenced significantly greater reductions in daily SSB consumption [M(SE) = -19.2 (2.74) oz] than those who did not [M(SE) = -2.5 (2.3) oz, p < .001], a difference of 16.72 oz. CONCLUSIONS: Frequent SSB consumers with stronger SSB cravings report minimal reductions in daily SSB consumption with a sales ban only, but report greater reductions if they also receive a motivational intervention. Future multilevel interventions for institutions should consider both environmental and individualized multi-level interventions. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION: NCT02585336.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 13 citations exist upstream.

References

2011False-Positive Psychology 2007How emotions affect eating: A five-way model 2012Changing Human Behavior to Prevent Disease: The Importance of Targeting Automatic Processes 1995Eating disorders and obesity : a comprehensive handbook 2015Food cue reactivity and craving predict eating and weight gain: a meta‐analytic review 2018Stress and Obesity 2015Which Foods May Be Addictive? The Roles of Processing, Fat Content, and Glycemic Load 2016Impact of the Berkeley Excise Tax on Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Consumption

Cited by

2024Components in downstream health promotions to reduce sugar intake among adults: a systematic review

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.