Buckeye Research Team Mythbusts Beliefs About Food Cost and Health

Consumers believe healthy food must be more expensive than cheap eats and that higher-priced food is healthier – even when there is no supporting evidence, according to new research.

The results mean not only that marketers can charge more for products that are touted as healthy, but that consumers may not believe that a product is healthy if it doesn’t cost more, researchers say. For example, people in one study thought eye health was a more important issue for them when they were told about an expensive but unfamiliar food ingredient that would protect their vision. If the same ingredient was relatively cheap, people didn’t think the issue it treated – eye health – was as important.

The study was conducted to examine the lay theory that we have to pay more to eat healthfully. Lay theories are the common-sense explanations people use to understand the world around them, whether they are true or not. Messages consistent with the “healthy = expensive” lay-theory are all around us. One example is the “Whole Paycheck” nickname people have given to Whole Foods, which touts itself as “America’s Healthiest Grocery Store.”

The results appear online in the Journal of Consumer Research.20

Researchers Explore Getting Rid of Stuff

While many of us were stuck at home over the last year online shopping numbers skyrocketed. Companies like Amazon boomed. But our homes became filled with even more stuff, maybe stuff we didn’t need.

Researchers at OSU might have some ideas on getting rid of extra stuff.

Such techniques could help parents eliminate baby items once their children have grown or a young person moving out for the first time sort through the their childhood knick-knacks.

The researchers conducted a field study involving 797 students who lived in six residence halls on campus. At the end of a fall semester, the researchers advertised a donation drive before the students left for the holidays. But there was a catch: There were actually two different advertising campaigns that varied by residence halls.

In the memory preservation campaign, signs in the residence hall bathrooms stated, “Don’t Pack up Your Sentimental Clutter…Just Keep a Photo of It, Then Donate.” In the control campaign, fliers told students, “Don’t Pack Up Your Sentimental Clutter, Just Collect the Items, Then Donate.” Similar numbers of students were exposed to both campaigns.

After finals week, research associates who were unaware of what the study was about emptied donation bins in each residence hall, counting the items donated.

The researchers found 613 items were donated in the halls that hosted the “memory preservation” campaign, versus only 533 in the control campaign.

In other related experiments, the researchers found that it wasn’t just the memories associated with these possessions that were keeping people from donating – it was the identities linked to those memories.

For example, older parents may still feel connected to their identity as new mothers and fathers and not want to part with their infant clothes.

Results showed that those who received the photos reported less identity loss than those who did not.

Researchers said that the bottom line is this technique can help anyone who is emotionally attached to items that could be donated or thrown away, helping declutter their lives.

OSU Research: When Old Becomes New Again

A team of researchers at the Ohio State University has been studying how to make old favorites feel novel again.

The study suggested that when a subject consumed something via an unconventional method they were more easily able to focus on what it was that they loved about it in the first place. This phenomenon has already been employed in “pitch black” restaurants. These popular eateries serve dinner in the dark.

The researchers conducted multiple experiments. In a study of 68 participants, subjects came to a lab thinking they were there for a study on how to help people eat more slowly. Some of the subjects ate 10 pieces of popcorn using just hands; the others ate the pieces with chopsticks. Subjects then rated their experience in a variety of ways. Some of the measures were overall enjoyment, how much flavor the popcorn had and how much fun they had eating it. Participants using the chopsticks later said they enjoyed eating the popcorn more than the subjects who used their hands.

“Atomic Bins” and Their Medical Application

Scientists have created originator particles that may one day have the capacity to search out and trap fatal nerve operators and other poisons in nature – and perhaps in people.

The researchers, driven by natural scientific experts from The Ohio State University, call these new particles “atomic bins.” As the name suggests, these particles are molded like bins and research in the lab has demonstrated they can discover mimicked nerve specialists, swallow them in their holes and trap them for safe evacuation.

In another examination distributed in Chemistry – An European Journal, the analysts ventured out making adaptations that could have potential for use in medications.

While this early research demonstrated the guarantee of sub-atomic crates in the earth, the researchers needed to check whether they could create comparative structures that could clear nerve operators or different poisons from people.

Posted in OSU

What We See vs. What We Choose

Researchers utilizing eye-following technology have discovered that what we see helps control our choices when given two decisions, for example, two snack choices.
Yet, it isn’t as simple as saying we essentially pick what we first focus on and nothing more, the study found. Rather, our gaze enhances our longing for options we typically like.
Let’s assume you’re seeing two sweet treats in a candy machine. You like the two, however you’re inclined toward the one with peanuts marginally more than the one with just chocolate. You’ll typically pick the one with peanuts, yet not always.

Another intriguing finding was that individuals would in general settle on their choices all the more immediately when they preferred both of their two decisions.

The scientists utilized information from six eye-following investigations including a sum of 228 individuals, some from their lab and some from different analysts.

These outcomes recommend that item advertising will have the greatest impact on things you effectively like, he said. In case you’re seeing two brands of a thing you like at a store, the bundle that catches and holds your eye will presumably have an edge when you’re choosing which to purchase.

By and large, this new examination demonstrates that the connection among consideration and decision is more mind boggling than recently accepted.

The examination was bolstered by the National Science Foundation.

Posted in OSU