How healthy and processed are foods and drinks promoted in supermarket sales flyers? A cross-sectional study in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate to what extent promotions in Dutch supermarket sales flyers contribute to a healthy diet and whether there are differences between supermarket types. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study investigating promotions on foods and beverages (n 7825) in supermarket sales flyers from thirteen Dutch supermarket chains (8-week period), including ten traditional, two discount and one organic supermarket chain(s). Promoted products were categorised by food group (e.g. bread), contribution to a healthy diet (yes/no), degree of processing (e.g. ultra-processed), promotion type (temporary reduction in price, volume-based promotions or advertised only) and percentage discount of price promotions. Differences between supermarket chains in the degree of healthiness and processing of products and the types of price promotions were investigated. RESULTS: In total, 70·7 % of all promoted products in supermarket sales flyers did not contribute to a healthy diet and 56·6 % was ultra-processed. The average discount on less healthy products (28·7 %) was similar to that of healthy products (28·9 %). Less healthy products were more frequently promoted via volume-based promotions than healthy products (37·6 % v. 25·4 %, P < 0·001). Discount supermarket chains promoted less healthy (80·3 %) and ultra-processed (65·1 %) products more often than traditional supermarket chains (69·6 % and 56·6 %, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of promoted products via supermarket sales flyers do not contribute to a healthy diet. As promotions are an important determinant of food purchasing decisions, supermarkets do not support healthy choices. Future studies should identify barriers that withhold supermarket chains from promoting more healthy foods in supermarket sales flyers.

A systematic review, and meta-analysis, examining the prevalence of price promotions on foods and whether they are more likely to be found on less-healthy foods.

OBJECTIVE: There are concerns that price promotions encourage unhealthy dietary choices. This review aims to answer the following research questions (RQ1) what is the prevalence of price promotions on foods in high-income settings, and (RQ2) are price promotions more likely to be found on unhealthy foods? DESIGN: Systematic review of articles published in English, in peer-review journals, after 1 January 2000. SETTING: Included studies measured the prevalence of price promotions (i.e. percentage of foods carrying a price promotion out of the total number of foods available to purchase) in retail settings, in upper-mid to high-income countries. PARTICIPANTS: 'Price promotion' was defined as a consumer-facing temporary price reduction or discount available to all customers. The control group/comparator was the equivalent products without promotions. The primary outcome for this review was the prevalence of price promotions, and the secondary outcome was the difference between the proportions of price promotions on healthy and unhealthy foods. RESULTS: Nine studies (239 344 observations) were included for the meta-analysis for RQ1, the prevalence of price promotions ranged from 6 % (95 % CI 2 %, 15 %) for energy-dense nutrient-poor foods to 15 % (95 % CI 9 %, 25 %) for cereals, grains, breads and other starchy carbohydrates. However, the I-squared statistic was 99 % suggesting a very high level of heterogeneity. Four studies were included for the analysis of RQ2, of which two supported the hypothesis that price promotions were more likely to be found on unhealthy foods. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of price promotions is very context specific, and any proposed regulations should be supported by studies conducted within the proposed setting(s).

Reducing consumption of unhealthy foods and beverages through banning price promotions: what is the evidence and will it work?

OBJECTIVE: Increasing prevalence of overweight and obese people in England has led policymakers to consider regulating the use of price promotions on foods high in fat, sugar and salt content. In January 2019, the government opened a consultation programme for a policy proposal that significantly restricts the use of price promotions that can induce consumers to buy higher volumes of unhealthy foods and beverages. These proposed policies are the first of their kind in public health and are believed to reduce excess purchasing and, therefore, overconsumption of unhealthy products. This study summarises evidence relating price promotions to the purchasing of food and drink for home consumption and places it in the context of the proposed policy. DESIGN: Non-systematic review of quantitative analyses of price promotions in food and drink published in peer-reviewed journals and sighted by PubMed, ScienceDirect & EBSCOhost between 1980 and January 2018. RESULTS: While the impact of price promotions on sales has been of interest to marketing academics for a long time with modelling studies showing that its use has increased food and drink sales by 12-43 %, it is only now being picked up in the public health sphere. However, existing evidence does not consider the effects of removing or restricting the use of price promotions across the food sector. In this commentary, we discuss existing evidence, how it deals with the complexity of shoppers' behaviour in reacting to price promotions on foods and, importantly, what can be learned from it in this policy context. CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence base supports the notion that price promotions increase purchasing of unhealthy food, and while the proposed restriction policy is yet to be evaluated for consumption and health effects, there is arguably sufficient evidence to proceed. This evidence is not restricted to volume-based promotions. Close monitoring and proper evaluation should follow to provide empirical evidence of its intended and unintended effects.

Do purchases of price promoted and generic branded foods and beverages vary according to food category and income level? Evidence from a consumer research panel.

Price is a key determinant of food choice, particularly for low-income households who may be more sensitive to price-lowering strategies such as price promotions and generic/retailer-owned brands. Price-lowering strategies may therefore represent important policy targets to improve population nutrition and reduce inequities. This study aimed to describe household purchasing patterns of price promoted and generic branded foods and beverages in New Zealand (2016-2017). One year of grocery purchase data from a national consumer research panel in New Zealand (n = 1778 households) were analysed. Purchases were classified by processing level and food type. Linear mixed models were fitted to estimate the mean proportion of annual household purchases (unique items and volumes (kg/L)) that were price promoted or generic branded (overall and by food category), and to assess whether purchasing patterns were modified by income level. On average, price promoted products constituted 50% (95%CIs; 49,51) of all unique annual household grocery items purchased. Fifty-nine percent (95%CIs; 58,60) of processed, 55% (95%CIs; 54,56) of ultra-processed, 45% (95%CIs; 44,46) of unprocessed and 45% (95%CIs; 44,46) of ingredient purchases were price promoted. By volume, the proportion of purchases that were price promoted was highest for meat (65%[95%CIs; 64,66]), sugar-sweetened beverages (64%[95%CIs; 62,65]), dairy foods (64%[95%CIs; 63,66]), confectionary (64%[95%CIs; 63,66]), snack foods (63%[95%CIs; 61,64]), oils (61%[95%CIs; 60,62]) and non-sugar-sweetened beverages (60%[95%CIs; 58,62]), and lowest for dairy beverages (30%[95%CIs; 28,31]), sugar/honey (33%[95%CIs; 32,35]) and sauces/spreads (39%[95%CIs; 37,40]). On average, generic brands constituted 10% (95%CIs; 9,10) of all household purchases. Overall, a significantly greater proportion of purchases made by low and middle-income households were price promoted and generic branded compared to high-income households (p < 0.001 for both), a pattern generally observed across food categories. This study supports recent calls to address unhealthy food and beverage price promotions in comprehensive policy strategies aiming to improve population diets and weight.

Receipt of direct tobacco mail/email coupons and coupon redemption: Demographic and socioeconomic disparities among adult smokers in the United States.

A key marketing strategy used by tobacco companies to lower tobacco product prices is the distribution of tobacco coupons via direct marketing channels such as mail or email. We analyzed data on adult smokers from Wave 1 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study (n = 10,994) to examine the prevalence and correlates of coupon receipt via both channels, and associations with cigarette coupon redemption. Overall, 22% and 32% of smokers received tobacco coupons via email and mail, respectively, and 22% redeemed cigarette coupons. White, 25-44 year old, female, sexual minority, and more nicotine dependent smokers were more likely to receive coupons via both channels and to redeem coupons, as were smokers with mid-levels education (GED to associate degree) and those unable to pay important bills (OR email receipt = 1.37, 95% CI 1.22-1.54; OR mail receipt = 1.38, 95% CI 1.24-1.55; and OR coupon redemption = 1.44, 95% CI 1.26-1.64). Smokers who received coupons via mail only or via both channels, had three times (OR = 2.97, 95% CI 2.31-3.83) and five times (OR = 4.56, 95% CI 3.61-5.76) higher odds to redeem cigarette coupons compared to those who received them via email only. Major demographic and socioeconomic disparities exist in receipt and redemption of direct email\mail tobacco coupons among US smokers. Cigarette coupons received via direct mail are more likely to be redeemed than coupons received via email. Restrictions on tobacco coupon redemption, implemented jointly with increasing access to affordable cessation resources, may incentivize smokers vulnerable to tobacco marketing tactics to quit.

Banning tobacco price promotions, smoking-related beliefs and behaviour: findings from the International Tobacco Control Four Country (ITC 4C) Survey.

BACKGROUND: Ecological models emphasise multilevel influences on health behaviours. While studies show that exposure to price promotions is associated with smoking behaviour and its antecedents, less is known about whether these associations differ by macro-level factors such as national price promotion policies. METHODS: Current and former smokers (N=4698) from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project four-country cohort were included in weighted multivariate logistic regression models to examine individual-level associations between exposure to price promotions at waves 7 and 8 (conducted in 2008-2009 and 2010-2011) and beliefs (social and injunctive norms, functional value of smoking, misconceptions around smoking and beliefs of tobacco industry and its regulations) and behaviour at wave 8, stratified by whether countries allow (Australia and USA) or ban (Canada and UK) price promotions. RESULTS: Associations between exposure to price promotions and smoking-related beliefs and behaviour differed by national price promotion policies. In countries that allow price promotions, participants repeatedly exposed to price promotions at waves 7 and 8 were more likely to associate functional values to smoking (ie, calms down when stressed (adjusted OR (AOR) 1.83) and to be current smokers at wave 8 (AOR 1.94). In countries that ban price promotions, participants repeatedly exposed to price promotions were less likely to hold misconceptions around smoking (ie, harsher smoke is more dangerous). CONCLUSIONS: Differential associations emerged between exposure to price promotions, smoking-related beliefs and behaviour across countries with and without a price promotions ban. Adopting price promotion bans could ameliorate the associations between exposure to price promotions and smoking beliefs and behaviours.

Neighbourhood exposure to point-of-sale price promotions for cigarettes is associated with financial stress among smokers: results from a population-based study.

AIM: To examine the association between neighbourhood exposure to point-of-sale (POS) cigarette price promotions and financial stress among smokers in a Midwestern metropolitan area in the USA. METHODS: Survey data from 888 smokers provided information on sociodemographic and smoking related variables. Financial stress was measured with the question: 'In the last six months, because of lack of money, was there a time when you were unable to buy food or pay any important bills on time, such as electricity, telephone, credit card, rent or your mortgage? (Yes/No).' Using audit data from 504 tobacco retailers, we estimated a score of POS price promotions for each respondent by summing the different types of promotion in each store in their neighbourhood, as defined by a 1-km roadway buffer. RESULTS: Adjusted results provided strong support for an association between higher scores of neighbourhood POS cigarette price promotions and a higher probability of financial stress (p=0.007). CONCLUSION: Exposure to POS cigarette price promotions is associated with financial stress. This finding, coupled with previous reports that smokers with financial stress are less likely to attempt to quit or succeed in quitting smoking, suggests that POS cigarette price promotions may act as an impediment to smoking cessation.

Deal or no deal? The prevalence and nutritional quality of price promotions among U.S. food and beverage purchases.

OBJECTIVE: This study examines trends in the prevalence of price promotions among packaged food and beverage purchases, differences in prevalence by household race/ethnicity or income, and the association between price promotions and the nutritional profile of purchases. DESIGN: This cross-sectional study utilizes a dataset of 90 million purchases from 38,744 (2008) to 45,042 (2012) US households in 2008-2012. Chi-square tests were used to examine whether the proportion of purchases with price promotions changed over time or differed by household race/ethnicity or income. T-tests were used to compare purchased products' nutritional profiles. RESULTS: Prevalence of price promotions among packaged food and beverage purchases increased by 8% and 6%, respectively, from 2008 to 2012, with both reaching 34% by 2012. Higher-income households had greater proportions of purchases with price promotions than lower-income households. Asian households had the highest proportion of purchases with any price promotion, followed by non-Hispanic whites. While total price-promoted packaged food purchases had higher mean energy, total sugar, and saturated fat densities than purchases with no price promotions, absolute differences were small. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of price promotions among US household purchases increased from 2008 to 2012 and was greater for higher-income households. No clear associations emerged between presence of price promotions and nutritional quality of purchases.

Price promotions for food and beverage products in a nationwide sample of food stores.

Food and beverage price promotions may be potential targets for public health initiatives but have not been well documented. We assessed prevalence and patterns of price promotions for food and beverage products in a nationwide sample of food stores by store type, product package size, and product healthfulness. We also assessed associations of price promotions with community characteristics and product prices. In-store data collected in 2010-2012 from 8959 food stores in 468 communities spanning 46 U.S. states were used. Differences in the prevalence of price promotions were tested across stores types, product varieties, and product package sizes. Multivariable regression analyses examined associations of presence of price promotions with community racial/ethnic and socioeconomic characteristics and with product prices. The prevalence of price promotions across all 44 products sampled was, on average, 13.4% in supermarkets (ranging from 9.1% for fresh fruits and vegetables to 18.2% for sugar-sweetened beverages), 4.5% in grocery stores (ranging from 2.5% for milk to 6.6% for breads and cereals), and 2.6% in limited service stores (ranging from 1.2% for fresh fruits and vegetables to 4.1% for breads and cereals). No differences were observed by community characteristics. Less-healthy versus more-healthy product varieties and larger versus smaller product package sizes generally had a higher prevalence of price promotion, particularly in supermarkets. On average, in supermarkets, price promotions were associated with 15.2% lower prices. The observed patterns of price promotions warrant more attention in public health food environment research and intervention.

The prevalence and magnitude of price promotions in online alcohol retail outlets.

INTRODUCTION: We examined the prevalence of price promotions (i.e., proportion of products on price promotion) and the magnitude of price promotions (i.e., size of the price discount compared to the regular price) among online alcohol retailers. METHODS: In August 2023, we web-scraped product information for all alcoholic beverages available for sale in the online stores of two leading alcohol retailers in Sydney, Australia. Products were classified into five primary alcohol categories: wine, spirits, beer, cider and premix drinks. We considered three types of price promotion: temporary price discounts (e.g., 'was $5 now $4'), multi-buy discounts (e.g., buy one get one free) and 'any six' discounts (e.g., 5% off when purchased in a bundle of any six similar products). The prevalence and mean magnitude of price promotions were estimated overall and by product category and price promotion type. RESULTS: In total, data for 11,184 products were collected. Of these, 62% were the subject of at least one of the assessed forms of price promotion. The most frequently price-promoted category was wine (91% of products), followed by spirits (35%), premix drinks (30%), cider (28%) and beer (21%). Of all price promotions, 61% were 'any six' discounts, 31% were temporary price discounts, and 7% were multi-buy discounts. Across all price promotions, the mean magnitude of price discount relative to the regular price was 11% and ranged from less than 1% to 71%. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Policymakers should consider restricting price promotions as part of a suite of strategies to reduce alcohol-related harms.

Longitudinal associations between receiving E-cigarette price promotions and subsequent E-cigarette use among U.S. Young adult cigarette smokers.

INTRODUCTION: E-cigarette price promotions (EPPs; i.e., marketed reductions in cost) may influence young adult cigarette smokers to try, dual use with, or completely transition to e-cigarettes. We assessed whether receiving EPPs was associated with subsequent e-cigarette use among this group. METHODS: Data were from Waves 4 (2016-2018) and 5 (2018-2019) of the nationally representative Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study survey. Analysis was restricted to participants who were young adult (18-34 years) established, current cigarette smokers who did not use e-cigarettes at Wave 4 (baseline; n = 2,664; Sample 1), and a subsample of those who tried to quit smoking completely in the past year at Wave 5 (follow-up; n = 948; Sample 2). Multivariable logistic regressions were used to examine associations between receiving EPPs at baseline and past year use of e-cigarettes in general (Sample 1) and to help quit smoking (Sample 2) at follow-up, controlling for covariates. RESULTS: Overall, 4.1% and 4.9% of Sample 1 and 2 participants received EPPs, respectively; At follow-up, 33.4% of Sample 1 participants used e-cigarettes, and 12.0% of Sample 2 participants used e-cigarettes to quit smoking. Receiving EPPs was associated with subsequent past-year e-cigarette use in general (AOR = 2.07; 95% CI = 1.31 to 3.27), and past-year e-cigarette use to help with quitting smoking (AOR = 3.20; 95% CI = 1.48 to 6.90). DISCUSSION: EPPs may increase e-cigarette use among established, current smokers and may be used to quit smoking. Research is needed to understand how EPPs may be differentially associated with complete product transition versus dual/poly use among young adult smokers.

Cross-category demand effects of price promotions.

Do promotions in a certain category lead to higher revenues in other categories? If so, to what degree? The answers to these questions are highly relevant for retailers that supply products in different categories. Empirical findings in studies that consider a limited number of categories indicate small promotional cross-category effects. This study develops a framework to determine the impact of price promotions on category revenues that include interdependencies among a substantial number of categories at the category demand level. The own- and cross-category demand effects are moderated by variables such as promotion intensity, category characteristics (own-category effects), and spatial distances between shelf locations (cross-category effects). The empirical results based on daily store-level scanner data show that approximately half of all price promotions expand own-category revenues, especially for categories with deeper supported discounts. There is a high probability (61%) that a price promotion affects sales of at least one other category. The number of categories affected is not greater than two. Moderate evidence supports the existence of cross-promotional effects between categories more closely located in a store.

The Effectiveness of Price Promotions in Purchasing Affordable Luxury Products: An Event-Related Potential Study.

Similar to traditional luxuries, affordable luxuries enjoy a high level of perceived product quality and perceived social status, but the effectiveness of price promotions of purchasing affordable luxury products is different from that of traditional luxuries. In order to further investigate the purchases of affordable luxuries, we used event-related potential (ERP) technology to reveal the formation of the purchase intention toward affordable luxuries at original prices (high or low) and current prices (discounted or non-discounted). Compared with the high-priced affordable luxury without a price promotion and the low-priced affordable luxury with a price promotion, consumers showed a stronger intention toward the high-priced affordable luxury with a price promotion, by weighing up three factors, perceived product quality, perceived social status, and perceived monetary saving at the behavioral level. A shorter reaction time emerged in the price promotion condition than in the absent price promotion condition when the original price was low. At the neural level, a decrease in N2 amplitude was found in the high original price and discounted current price condition than the high original price and non-discounted current price condition and the low original price and discounted current price condition, respectively, suggesting that the price information of the latter two conditions might not be the expectation information of subjects, and thus, the enhanced conflict is produced. The high-priced affordable luxury product without a price discount evoked a more positive LPP amplitude than the high-priced affordable luxury product with price promotions or than the low-priced affordable luxury item without price promotions, demonstrating that participants could regard the former as an evaluative inconsistent condition and the latter as evaluative consistent conditions. These results are helpful to better understand the effects of price promotions on purchasing affordable luxury products at different original prices.

The frequency and magnitude of price-promoted beverages available for sale in Australian supermarkets.

OBJECTIVE: Price promotions are used to influence purchases and represent an important target for obesity prevention policy. However, no long-term contemporary data on the extent and frequency of supermarket price promotions exists. We aimed to evaluate the frequency, magnitude and weekly variation of beverage price promotions available online at two major Australian supermarket chains over 50 weeks. METHODS: Beverages were categorised into four policy-relevant categories (sugar-sweetened beverages, artificially-sweetened beverages, flavoured milk and 100% juice, milk and water). The proportional contribution of each category to the total number of price proportions, the proportion of price promotions within the available product category, the mean discount, and weekly variation in price promotions were calculated. RESULTS: For Coles and Woolworths respectively, 26% and 30% of all beverages were price promoted in any given week. Sugar-sweetened beverages made up the greatest proportion of all price promotions (Coles: 46%, Woolworths: 49%). Within each product category, the proportion of sugar-sweetened and artificially-sweetened beverages that were price promoted was similar, higher than the other categories and reasonably constant over time. Diet drinks and sugar-sweetened soft drinks were most heavily discounted (by 29-40%). CONCLUSIONS: Beverage price promotions are used extensively in Australian supermarkets, undermining efforts to promote healthy population diets. Implications for public health: Policies restricting price promotions on sugar-sweetened beverages are likely to be an important part of strategies to reduce obesity and improve population nutrition.

Impact on alcohol purchasing of a ban on multi-buy promotions: a quasi-experimental evaluation comparing Scotland with England and Wales.

AIMS: To evaluate the impact of the 2011 Scottish ban on multi-buy promotions of alcohol in retail stores. DESIGN AND SETTING: Difference-in-differences analysis was used to estimate the impact of the ban on the volume of alcohol purchased by Scottish households, compared with those in England and Wales, between January 2010 and June 2012. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 22 356 households in Scotland, England and Wales. MEASUREMENTS: Records of alcohol purchasing from each of four categories (beer and cider, wine, spirits and flavoured alcoholic beverages), as well as total volume of pure alcohol purchased. FINDINGS: Controlling for general time trends and household heterogeneity, there was no significant effect of the multi-buy ban in Scotland on volume of alcohol purchased either for the whole population or for individual socio-economic groups. There was also no significant effect on those who were large pre-ban purchasers of alcohol. Most multi-buys were for beer and cider or for wine. The frequency of shopping trips involving beer and cider purchases increased by 9.2% following the ban (P < 0.01), while the number of products purchased on each trip decreased by 8.1% (P < 0.01). For wine, however, these effects were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Banning multi-buy promotions for alcohol in Scotland did not reduce alcohol purchasing in the short term. Wider regulation of price promotion and price may be needed to achieve this.