Skip to main content

Table 1 Participants’ characteristics

From: Socioeconomic position and the impact of increasing availability of lower energy meals vs. menu energy labelling on food choice: two randomized controlled trials in a virtual fast-food restaurant

 Study 1a
(n = 868)
Study 2b
(n = 875)
Age, years, mean (SD)35.5 (13.4)36.1 (12.0)
Gender, female, n (%)419 (48.27)463 (52.91)
Ethnicity, n (%)
White789 (90.90)801 (91.54)
BMI, kg/m2, mean (SD)26.5 (5.78)27.1 (5.98)
Missing, implausiblec, n (%)16 (1.84)16 (1.83)
Highest educational level, n (%)
No qualification17 (1.96)15 (1.71)
1–3 GCSEs62 (7.14)52 (5.94)
4+ GCSEs144 (16.59)119 (13.60)
A level243 (28.00)286 (32.69)
Higher education or Bachelor’s degree311 (35.83)330 (37.72)
Post-Graduate degree91 (10.48)73 (8.34)
Years of higher education, mean (SD)3.17 (2.63)3.16 (2.52)
Equivalised income, £, mean (SD)19,652 (26561)20,296 (15139)
Subjective socioeconomic status, mean (SD)4.99 (1.62)4.95 (1.53)
Student, yes, n (%)217 (25.00)32 (3.66)
Fast-food consumption frequency, n (%)
Less than once per month259 (29.84)247 (28.23)
1–3 times per month436 (50.23)456 (52.46)
1 time per week or more173 (19.93)169 (19.31)
Dieting status, yes, n (%)119 (13.71)121 (13.83)
  1. aSee Additional file 1: Section 5 – Table S4 for study 1 detailed participants’ characteristics. bSee Additional file 1: Section 5 – Table S5 for study 2 detailed participants’ characteristics. cBMI implausible values: BMI > 10 or BMI < 60 [58]