Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Study Finds Fast-Food Logos Make You Impatient

samzenpus posted more than 4 years ago | from the I-got-the-cowboyneal-jitters dept.

Advertising 122

A study conducted by the University of Toronto has found that exposure to fast-food logos can cause people to feel impatient and make them more likely to buy things. Subjects in the study were exposed to nearly imperceptible flashes of images (for 12 to 80 milliseconds) which included fast-food logos for some. The subjects were then asked to read about and choose between two different kinds of skin-care treatments, one of which was a three-in-one. Those who had the logos flashed before them read "significantly faster" and chose the more time-saving skin product. From the article: "The researchers concluded 'fast food, originally designed to save time, can have the unexpected consequence of inducing haste and impatience' and 'preference for time-saving products when there are potentially other important aspects upon which to choose a product.' So, basically, driving past a McDonald's on the highway has the potential to not only make you drive faster, it will make you more likely to buy two-for-one Pantene Pro-V Shampoo and Conditioner the next time you go to Duane Reade. One, it seems, is considerably less ominous than the other." I guess this explains why my nephews will chew on their seat belts and try to get out the windows just to be first into the McDonald's Playland.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

tl;dr (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31910620)

tl;dr

Re:tl;dr (-1, Redundant)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910780)

Some mod has no sense of humor. Please mod parent up.

Re:tl;dr (0, Flamebait)

masshuu (1260516) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911902)

They were to busy eating their big-mac and they wanted to spend their points.

Re:tl;dr (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31911138)

This was moderated offtopic??????

It's true! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31911334)

Here's [youtube.com] a follow-up on one of the subjects.

So does seeing the windows logo... (0, Troll)

Orga (1720130) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910638)

make you patient?

Re:So does seeing the windows logo... (0)

FreonTrip (694097) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910950)

No, but it tends to put me in a frame of mind that expects to be irritated, and that is more likely to be pleased when the system works as it should. Windows 7 was a positive surprise by those metrics, and it generally feels good and acts right... but whenever I hop back into Linux with Enlightenment 16, things snap back into perspective.

Re:So does seeing the windows logo... (0)

zach_the_lizard (1317619) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911690)

No, it makes me boil with rage and seek out the nearest lifeform to make vengeance upon. Last time I saw it, a bus full of nuns paid for it. It's ok, though; I've been sent to therapy, so it doesn't make me as angry. Just enough to commit assault and battery.

ARRRRGGGHHHHH (0, Redundant)

Kc_spot (1677970) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910670)

needfoodnow needburgerchickentacospizzanow needbuynow needfoodnownowNOWNOOOWWW!!!!1111!!!111!!!!!1111elevenone1!!!!!!111

Re:ARRRRGGGHHHHH (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31911490)

The Great Foodening... It begins.

For years, mankind talked about a future, a future of a "singularity". They were right, but in ways they never expected.

God help us all.

Hurry up already! (5, Funny)

barfcat (1741432) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910682)

NEXT STORY!!!

Re:Hurry up already! (3, Funny)

JustOK (667959) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910994)

NEXT COMMENT!!

Re:Hurry up already! (1)

hldn (1085833) | more than 4 years ago | (#31914430)

it may be funny, but i actually stopped reading the summary halfway through and tabbed to my next open story.

Lookit the shapes (1)

drachenstern (160456) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910686)

Actually those logos tend to have an arrow-like shape. Reckon how that plays into things. What if they were more octagonal?

Re:Lookit the shapes (1)

molnarcs (675885) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911086)

It's more likely that those logos are deeply associated in your mind with ... well, fast food. Meaning a certain type of lifestyle. Fast food is something you finish in less then 30 minutes. At least that's my definition. A proper meal 1) takes at least one hour 2) is not eaten alone 3) if it's eaten alone, you must have a newspaper or a good book handy for the pauses you take between the starters, main courses and the dessert. This is another type of lifestyle. All those logos remind you of having to finish your meal in 30 minutes, and the impatient lifestyile it implies :)

Re:Lookit the shapes (2, Insightful)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911124)

It would have been interesting to do the study for two different groups - those who eat fast food and those who do not.

Re:Lookit the shapes (0, Flamebait)

karcirate (1685354) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912560)

True. For example, are those Jews and Muslims, who will not eat at any of those "joints", affected in the same way as those who aren't? (And would that explain why th -- wait, I am going to stop before I say something stupid.)

Re:Lookit the shapes (3, Funny)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#31913238)

Minor correction:

I am going to stop before I say something else stupid

Re:Lookit the shapes (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911272)

Fast food is something you finish in less then 30 minutes. At least that's my definition. A proper meal 1) takes at least one hour 2) is not eaten alone 3) if it's eaten alone, you must have a newspaper or a good book handy for the pauses you take between the starters, main courses and the dessert.

Dominos was on the list. The pizza delivery joint.

My pizza eating experience goes something like:

Eat a slice a pizza, wipe hands on shirt (just being honest here), wash down w/ sip of beer, play a couple rounds of civilization or other non-realtime strategy game, repeat until no longer hungry or out of pizza and/or beer. Takes at least an hour, and eating room temperature pizza probably violates all kinds of safe food handling rules, so I sometimes refrigerate before eating (weird, but true).

Go outside. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31911472)

Just saying. They sell napkins out there, too.

Re:Lookit the shapes (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911810)

A couple of hours isn't going to make much difference, especially if you aren't planning on storing what is left after that. This page seems legitimate enough, and it says below 70 F in 2 hours, below 40 F in 4 hours:

http://web.extension.illinois.edu/meatsafety/storing/holding.html [illinois.edu]

(I'm using meat as a simplification, I would think that the bread, cheese, sauce and other toppings will all be less of a problem...)

Re:Lookit the shapes (0)

Rob Kaper (5960) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911906)

Room temperature pizza is perfectly safe to eat. Even that left-over slice the next morning. Refridgerating your pizza first doesn't sound weird to me but more like a case of mysophobia.

And actually, I've always learned that warm dishes need to chill down to room temperature before putting them in the fridge because the sudden cool down is even worse when it comes to bacteria etc.

Re:Lookit the shapes (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912502)

Refridgerating your pizza first doesn't sound weird to me but more like a case of mysophobia.

Mysophobia, no, I'm cool with dirt. Pathological fear of food poisoning, now thats me. I've had some simply astounding experiences a several hours after consuming McDonalds breakfast egg-product sandwiches, and of course the proverbial Taco Bell. Could not find the word for that phobia, despite some google searching. SitoToxiPhobia? Maybe just "commonsense"?

I like cheese on crackers, cold pizza is about the same technology but tastes better.

Re:Lookit the shapes (2, Informative)

Mister Whirly (964219) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912726)

If you are experiencing symptoms a mere few hours after eating, that generally isn't food poisoning. You had an upset stomach. "Food poisoning" is thrown about way too much and does not mean you suffered ill effects from food.- it means a specific food borne illness is present in the food. If it had actually been food poisoning, there would have likely been a large outbreak, and believe me you KNOW when it really is food poisoning. You are very sick for multiple days and usually need to be hospitalized. Having the squirts after eating Taco Bell isn't food poisoning - it is just what happens. And eating pizza hot when it arrives is safer than trying to cool it down. The danger zone for bacteria is between 40 - 140 degrees Fahrenheit. Food that is heated to over 140 degrees can be left out at room temperature for up to 4 hours before it would need to be either above 140 or below 40. Putting warm pizza in the fridge right away will actually put it in the danger zone faster than if you just ate it.

Re:Lookit the shapes (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912530)

"Dominos was on the list. The pizza delivery joint."

God, what a sorry excuse for a pizza place...

I mean, ok, I can justify it on occasion when you are smashed...you get home from the bar, it is about 2:30am (maybe earlier if not in a college town) and you gotta have something to eat. You call them, and get something that tastes like artificial cheese covered cardboard that you graciously devour before passing out.

But given a choice? Hell, there are frozen pizzas today that are better than domino's and most chain pizza places.

I guess because I'm more carb conscious these days, and don't eat pizza as often...it has become a TREAT for me, and I'm not gonna waste a treat to myself on crap pizza. I've found some GREAT local chain places here near me, and I'll hit them with a vengeance. Last time, I said the hell with takeout, and actually went to sit and eat there...drink a few beers and have fun eating OUT. There is also something about eating your pizza pretty much right out of the oven, it is SO much better. Pizzas really start to die pretty quickly once out of the oven...during transport time for pickup or delivery.

Again, I don't begrudge a drunk call late at night for chain pizza, but if you are relatively sober, and at regular meal times, go look for a great local pizza place, and eat in there for a change.

Re:Lookit the shapes (1)

Sique (173459) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911678)

Fast food is something you finish in less then 30 minutes.

Sorry, but I finish every meal within 30 min (plus the time I'm waiting for the next course to be served).
Maybe I am more an inhalator of food than an actual eater.

Re:Lookit the shapes (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912272)

The article says some of the images contained fast food logos, but it doesn't say what the others contained.

That makes it difficult to determine whether it's something intrinsic to the logos, or a learned association.

Re:Lookit the shapes (1)

gtall (79522) | more than 4 years ago | (#31913042)

"Fast food is something you finish in less then 30 minutes."

This should read: Fast food is something that finishes with you in less then 30 minutes.

Re:Lookit the shapes (1)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912510)

Doesn't matter. All the logos make me say only:

"Why TF do they call this FAST food?"

Re:Lookit the shapes (1)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912522)

On second thought, they might have a point.

Re:Lookit the shapes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31914058)

Really?

because the logos make me say,

"Why TF to they call this fast FOOD?"

Nausea (1)

sanctimonius hypocrt (235536) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910716)

Reading this upset my stomach.

Re:Nausea (1)

Darkman, Walkin Dude (707389) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911532)

Too right, I can't even look at a McDonalds these days without getting the quabblies.

Associations, not logogs (1)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910720)

Most people have a learned association, i.e. the logos make them think of eating particular favorite food -- and many people are impatient and eager to get around obstacles when their appetite is stimulated. I doubt the logos themselves have any intrinsic power. :)

Re:Associations, not logogs (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911140)

I agree. I don't see how it would be narrowed down to fast-food in that sense. I'm sure that sports logos, and brand names, and Coke and Pepsi products would all be found to have the same effects if logos themselves were the ones with the power to alter your state of mind.

No, its most likely your mind playing a subconcious trick because you already know about the logo. You look at it, and you don't think, "Hmmm, Golden Arches make me impatient", you think "I could go for some McDonalds, because I don't feel like cooking". Then you are in the mindset that you don't have time to cook, and you are impatient from thereafter.

Just like how looking at this nice Big Brand Coffee Cup makes me feel a little more relaxed at work, even though I haven't sipped it yet.

Re:Associations, not logogs (1)

FooAtWFU (699187) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911348)

Did they do any studying to tell whether the effect was more pronounced among people who regularly had fast food?

Amazing (0, Redundant)

tmosley (996283) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910724)

I'm impatient with this story already!

cue the comments (-1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910784)

overintellectualizing and deducing vague ominous things from this pointless bit of fluff

and the historically myopic who bemoan the death of some (mythological) era of human behavior that in reality is clearly inferior in terms of quality of life to the present

Re:cue the comments (1)

vxice (1690200) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910954)

don't forget the comments about correlation doesn't mean causation followed by feeble attempts to explain statistics.

Re:cue the comments (1)

NewbieProgrammerMan (558327) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911142)

cue the comments overintellectualizing and deducing vague ominous things from this pointless bit of fluff

That was already happening in the summary:

So, basically, driving past a McDonald's on the highway has the potential to not only make you drive faster...

So any comments of the kind you're describing should be moderated redundant.

This doesn't surprise me (1)

ReneeJade (1649107) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910792)

I've worked for two different fast food chains as a customer service person and there is huge pressure on the staff to keep things moving fast (seconds count, statistics are everything). Most staff in these places are too young or too lazy to hide the fact that they are under huge pressure. Those vibes are going to rub off on the customer and the whole place. Frankly, if you don't make up your mind fast, you're going to really piss the staff off.

Re:This doesn't surprise me (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911536)

I've worked for two different fast food chains as a customer service person and there is huge pressure on the staff to keep things moving fast (seconds count, statistics are everything). Most staff in these places are too young or too lazy to hide the fact that they are under huge pressure. Those vibes are going to rub off on the customer and the whole place. Frankly, if you don't make up your mind fast, you're going to really piss the staff off.

And the people behind you.

I never did understand those who mindlessly stand in line, then at the very end look at the menu and decide then. After all, you had all the time in the world in the lineup to review the menu, the current day's news, the weather around the world, etc. in the lineup, but no, only when you get to the front of the line do you act with surprise like the menu's only visible by you and then stand and think.

Re:This doesn't surprise me (1)

gknoy (899301) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911614)

Sometimes people leave their glasses in the car, or aren't wearing contacts, or sometimes the lighting is just bad enough that there's an inconvenient glare. Some people (like me) genuinely take a long time deciding - I will be thinking about what I want to order from the time I get in the line, but occasionally can't decide between two items, and eventually have to decide to be dissatisfied with which ever decision I make.

Re:This doesn't surprise me (1)

ReneeJade (1649107) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911724)

Of course. And the fact that I understand that is the reason I can go to my weekend fast-food job, at the end of a week studying science and engineering, and take peoples orders with a genuine smile on my face. But the truth is, there are very stupid people out there.

Re:This doesn't surprise me (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912630)

"Sometimes people leave their glasses in the car, or aren't wearing contacts, or sometimes the lighting is just bad enough that there's an inconvenient glare. Some people (like me) genuinely take a long time deciding - I will be thinking about what I want to order from the time I get in the line, but occasionally can't decide between two items, and eventually have to decide to be dissatisfied with which ever decision I make."

Ok, I'll give you this one...BUT, what about the jackass you're behind in the checkout line at the grocery store, who lets her whole fucking set of groceries get rung up...and only then does she think to reach for her checkbook, and start then to fill it out.

I'm not against writing checks mind you...while I pay with cash 99% of the time, I sometimes write a check, however, the second I'm at the counter and they start to ring things, I have my checkbook out, and ask the cashier for a pen if I don't have one. By the time they've totaled my bill, all I have to do is write the amount in the ledger and then quickly write the amount in the last 2x blanks I have on the face of the check and I'm good to go...all of about 20 seconds maybe.

Re:This doesn't surprise me (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 4 years ago | (#31913076)

Don't get in line until you know what you're going to order.

Re:This doesn't surprise me (1)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 4 years ago | (#31913078)

Sometimes people leave their glasses in the car, or aren't wearing contacts

I can honestly say I don't give a damn. Whatever the reason, they are still holding other people up unnessarly.

sometimes the lighting is just bad enough that there's an inconvenient glare

Hmm, I don't think I've ever seen this particular problem.

Some people (like me) genuinely take a long time deciding - I will be thinking about what I want to order from the time I get in the line, but occasionally can't decide between two items, and eventually have to decide to be dissatisfied with which ever decision I make.

So don't get in the line until you've decided. As far as not being satisified either way... you should leave rather than buy something you don't want. I can't imagine why I'd buy something I knew I'd dislike.

Re:This doesn't surprise me (1)

Smauler (915644) | more than 4 years ago | (#31914450)

Some people (like me) genuinely take a long time deciding - I will be thinking about what I want to order from the time I get in the line, but occasionally can't decide between two items, and eventually have to decide to be dissatisfied with which ever decision I make.

That's absolutely fine as long as you do it on your time. If you start doing it on my time, I'm going to get a little pissed off.

Re:This doesn't surprise me (1)

ReneeJade (1649107) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911670)

LOL well said. Now see how you feel when you have a stressed out manager standing behind you giving you dirty looks, and some bloke in the kitchen shouting "SERVICE TIME, REGISTER 16!", because people don't realise that they can see the menu from fifth in line. Nothing enlightens you to the stupidity of humans like fast food work... except maybe IT work.

Re:This doesn't surprise me (0, Troll)

SleazyRidr (1563649) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912106)

Sometimes I do it just to be a dick.

Re:This doesn't surprise me (0, Troll)

ReneeJade (1649107) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912294)

Sometimes I do it just to be a dick.

I had mod points for 9 days running, ending two days ago, and now you show up.

Re:This doesn't surprise me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31913874)

Yes, especially at McDonalds. Does anyone NOT KNOW what is on their menu by now? They've had essentially the same menu for several decades. And all of their newer crap is on a big poster board beside the lineup, on the door coming into the store, and pretty much everywhere else you might look on your way to the counter.

It's the advertising, not the logos per se (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31910794)

Fast food companies spend hundred of millions to market products. People are conditioned to see the logos and buy the products. The conditioning kicks in whenever the logos are displayed. I posit that it's not the fast food logos, it's any well marketed logos - Nike, etc. probably work equally well.

Re:It's the advertising, not the logos per se (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31910880)

Some people (crazy conspiracy nutters) actually believe that the shapes used in corporate logos are ancient symbols ingrained into the human mind that are being used to control us.

heh (1)

Krneki (1192201) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910870)

It's not like they force you to buy anything.

P.S: Adblock plus FTW!

Re:heh (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#31913378)

Researches are looking for ways to go straight from the seeing the ads to be compulsion to buy it part of the brain, and they are making headway.*

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/16/science/16tier.html?_r=1 [nytimes.com]

*see what I did there?

So you mean (1)

lxs (131946) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910886)

That they're effective?

Re:So you mean (1)

Velorium (1068080) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910980)

That's what I'm wondering, because if so, that's actually frightening.

Marketing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31912596)

God I hate marketing.

Re:So you mean (0, Redundant)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#31913392)

You think that is frighting?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/16/science/16tier.html?_r=1 [nytimes.com]

Re:So you mean (1)

Velorium (1068080) | more than 4 years ago | (#31914130)

Woah, touché.

I'm sorry... (4, Funny)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910924)

There were too many fast food logos in the summary picture and I was too impatient to read the rest of the article, in fact I don't think I can complete this sentenc...

Re:I'm sorry... (1)

Kirin Fenrir (1001780) | more than 4 years ago | (#31914364)

There were too many fast food logos in the summary picture and I was too impatient to read the rest of the article, in fact I don't think I can complete this sentenc...

Candlejack? Was that y

Or maybe... (1)

Reziac (43301) | more than 4 years ago | (#31910992)

...it's just that having your concentration disrupted, even on a subliminal level, is irritating, which in turn quite typically makes people impatient, and more liable to just do whatever the hell is in front of them rather than giving it thought first.

Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31911044)

I don't know what the article is about. All I see are those logos and the title that says that those logos make me impatience.

(attempt at humour here for those who think I'm being serious)

Too long (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31911104)

Didn't read

It's the colours I bet. (1)

Antony-Kyre (807195) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911146)

Red and yellow. Don't those make us more impatience?

STUDY FINDS BEING SUBJECTED TO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31911178)

imperceptible flashes of anything makes one impatient and anxiety ridden you fucking ninnies

Bastards? (1)

Thanshin (1188877) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911258)

Excuse me but, what were they trying to achieve by subliminally showing food logos to people and then putting shampoo in front of them?

I think someone was going for a much more spectacular result.

Re:Bastards? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31912168)

I think someone was going for a much more spectacular result.

What, that they would eat the shampoo?

My view (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31911318)

Personally, I think it's because the only time you really ever SEE those signs in your daily life is on you way to work or just driving. I'm always impatient when driving and always in a rush somewhere. That's how I see the association.

Impatient? (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911328)

For the most part, those logos make me nauseous, not impatient!

Old news... (1)

DocJohn (81319) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911400)

C'mon, this is old news! We reported on this a week ago...

http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2010/04/13/fast-food-induces-haste-impatience/ [psychcentral.com]

Re:Old news... (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#31913404)

really? you consider something posted on another blog a week ago 'old news'?

Running out of time. (1)

wjousts (1529427) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911434)

FTA:

exposure to fast-food symbols -- including the logos of McDonald's, KFC, Subway and Taco Bell -- make people both less likely to save money and more likely to feel like they're running out of time.

Funny, eating McDonald's, KFC, Subway and Taco Bell makes me feel like I'm running out of time. Time left to live that is.

Re:Running out of time. (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911672)

You can eat healthy at any of them if you try. Hell it isn't even that hard at Subway and Taco Bell. Not that any of them are going to TASTE very good, but from a purely "sustenance that isn't bad for you" standpoint, all have good options available. Heck when I'm in a hurry I actually have found that the Mandarin Chicken Salad at Wendy's is pretty darned good.

Re:Running out of time. (0)

canajin56 (660655) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912986)

You can't eat healthy at Subway unless you get something without sauce, cheese, or bread ;). In terms of "good for you" you can go to the grocers and just buy those prewashed bags of salad, and a plastic fork. Enjoy! Faster and cheaper, and you'll have leftovers! And the Mandarin Chicken Salad is really bad for you, because even if you don't use the dressing or noodles it comes with, those orange slices (OK technically mandarin oranges aren't a kind of orange...) are marinated in pure corn syrup. Still, it's an almost not bad for you meal if you don't put the noodles or the dressing on. Because not only is the dressing also packed with sugar for no good reason, it's also got extremely high sodium levels. We're talking 1.25 g of sodium. A full half of your daily RDA in the USA, and pretty much your entire RDA in the UK. But, it IS their healthiest salad. Their Caesar will kill you faster than a baconator, and the BLT Salad? 1.8 g of sodium!!! Anywho, at least it spinach and swiss chard in it, dark greens. An infinitesimal amount, but still, they're in there.

The interesting thing about fast food, is how the amount of fast food people eat is not correlated with the obesity epidemic at all. Correlation is not causation, but no correlation is quite often no causation. If not, it's at least causation that's weak enough to be dominated by other factors ;) What obesity IS correlated with is the food pyramid. If you graph obesity for the last 100 years, you'll see it more or less flat, with a very slight increase over time as portion sizes grow. Fast food takes off, obesity doesn't even twitch. Then in the 80s you get the food pyramid, and the slope of obesity over time goes up by a factor of 30! Obesity is going from linear to exponential now. Because the higher it gets, the more we push high sugar, low fat diets, like in the food pyramid, and it doesn't work, it doesn't work at all. If you went to France 300 years ago and ask a master chef what makes rich people so fat, he'll tell you "cake!". Then suddenly in the 80s, it stopped being breads and cakes and other starches that made you fat, suddenly it was fat! Nutritionists laughed and laughed at how stupid they'd been for hundreds of years! They were too busy looking for correlations and doing studies! It was so simple, fat is as fat does, the end, fuck studies, it's true because it's simple! Occam's Razor! You'd think that, with hundreds of years of anecdotal and also rigerous correlation between starch and sugar intakes, and obesity, it would take a serious study to blow that out of the water. But, nutritionists don't do studies showing that high fat diets make you fat, because those studies fail, leaving them two choices: Be a scientist and publish results that don't agree with orthodoxy, and destroy your career, or just bury it and pretend it never happened. They chose B usually. Those who chose A, as I said, run out of the profession on a rail. So it's pretty well known now that you don't do that study, because the orthodoxy is wrong, and if you try to rub their faces in it, they will end you.

At any rate, I've never understood how fast food is considered as fast...in the time you spend in line, then waiting for them to make it, you could have made something cheaper and better for you at home. It's not fast food, it's procrastinated food. I'll spend 10 minutes at lunch waiting (maybe less if you didn't have any travel time?), instead of 5 minutes in the morning making. That seems like a loss, but that's future me's problem, not mine!

Re:Running out of time. (1, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 4 years ago | (#31913714)

Man, you're post is choke full of nutrient ignorance.

First off, you can get a ham sandwich with a ton of veggies and no Mayo. It's pretty healthy. Sure you could also get the 12" meatball mariners with extra cheese. But as the poster pointed out, it's not hard to eat healthy at Subways..or any of those place listed. Subway is the best of the bunch.

"those prewashed bags of salad, and a plastic fork."
Many of hem are not terrible healthy. They are mostly iceberg lettuce, which is water barely being held together. Be sure to get the ones with darker greens, like spinach... and don't put any dressing on it. So, yeah that will be tasty~

" are marinated in pure corn syrup."
And...? There isn't anything inherently bad in that. Unless you eat too much of it.

"Because not only is the dressing also packed with sugar for no good reason, "
yeah, they spend money to put sugar in it for no reason what so ever~

"But, it IS their healthiest salad."
no it isn't. The veggie delight salad is, and the Subway club is the worse one. But so what? a salad is just a type of meal preparation. not some magical diet food. No salad there has 1.25 g of sodium. The highest is 800mg. It's a lot, but no where near what you claim.

You're whole rant on the food pyrmid is just plain wrong.
A) it was created in ther 1960s. well before fast food took off. IN fact, fast food didn't take off until the 1980s boom.

"high fat diets make you fat, because those studies fail, l"
many good studies show that in fact, high fat diets does contribute to obesity. as does putting too many calories in your mouth.

" Those who chose A, as I said, run out of the profession on a rail.

That is a common and wrong logical fallacies. Scientist who do good pier reviewed studies that are contrary to common conceptions are supported and rewarded in the scientific community. They need to be good and repeatable studies. That argument infuriates me because it perpetuates a fallacy with he scientific community, and it always indicate the person spouting off is full of shit.

Fast food can be fast.
I can get a hamburger fries and soda in 5 minutes. Good luck doing that at home.
Not that I would anymore.

Who the hell waits 10 minutes for fast food? next time, time yourself. Plus it has the added bonus that I walk an extra 6 blocks.

You're time is a fallacy anyways since most people have a set time for lunch. Even if your example was correct, what would you do with the extra few minutes during lunch?

You are a product of lies spread buy 'nutritionist' and people who write diet books.

Try studying the actual science some time.

Re:Running out of time. (1)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 4 years ago | (#31914146)

Even if your example was correct, what would you do with the extra few minutes during lunch?

Smoke a cigarette.

On science and Pier Review (1)

jonaskoelker (922170) | more than 4 years ago | (#31914670)

Scientist who do good pier reviewed studies

If a scientist gets a bad pier review, will the university (or other employer) have his pay docked?

I'm here all week. Try the instant veal burger ;-)

Re:Running out of time. (3, Informative)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31913742)

In terms of "good for you" you can go to the grocers and just buy those prewashed bags of salad, and a plastic fork. Enjoy! Faster and cheaper, and you'll have leftovers!

And end up severely malnourished ;). Most of those bagged salads are less than 100. Unless you're eating a LOT more for your other meals and snacking, you can't survive on that. Most adult males are going to need 1600-1800 calories per day minimum to avoid lethargy. Most active men can have the daily recommended 2000 without issue.

Those calories have to come from somewhere. Now, lettuce and other such things we commonly find in salads are GREAT fillers to make your stomach feel full, but you have to also add some other things into your diet to get those calories, because you need them. Grilled meats, non-fried starches, fruits, nuts, etc are all good sources to get that from. Non-fatty salad dressings are also fine in moderation.

Take the mandarin chicken salad for I referenced for example - low in saturated fat & cholesterol, and the entire salad prepared with all included condiments is around 550 calories. In other words, you have 1 for lunch and 1 (or any other similarly laid out meal) for dinner along with a small breakfast and you've still got a decent amount of calories to spare for a few well placed snacks and the like.

Too often there's a tendency to say that "This has sugar so it's bad". "This has salt so it's bad.". "This has fat so it's bad.". The reality is we need a little bit of everything - just not in the quantities provided by a supersized big mac combo.

Look at the big picture instead of single ingredients. Find me anybody who is typically eating salads (even fast food salads, and even the ones with relatively mild non-mayo based dressings), reasonably sized subs (ie, 6" - no footlongs, but yes, even with that evil bread), and/or fast food tacos sans cheese and with grilled chicken, and is drinking water along with those meals rather than sugary sodas. I can pretty much guarantee that they will be of a completely healthy weight and will not have any diet-related health issues.

Re:Running out of time. (1)

Smauler (915644) | more than 4 years ago | (#31914706)

As much as everyone hates to deny it, calories are basically the only things that matter. It doesn't matter if you get them by carbs or fats, if you eat too many calories, you'll get fatter. People rant about different diets... eg the atkins. They did a study of people doing Atkins diets, and they found that the people who lost weight took in less calories. It wasn't about carbs or fat, it was just purely less calories.

They got hungry... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31911576)

... and wanted to go someplace else and eat.

What if they had shown pictures of food instead?

What else have they tried flashing? (2, Insightful)

mi (197448) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911618)

Could it be, that simply flashing anything colorful — be it a McDonald's logo, or Obama's "Hope" poster — will make a person impatient?

Re:What else have they tried flashing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31911788)

You mean they could actually use SCIENCE? Wouldn't that possible sabotage their beautiful conclusion? People don't do that anymore, and you don't get paid for sabotaging yourself..

Re:What else have they tried flashing? (3, Insightful)

jfengel (409917) | more than 4 years ago | (#31914710)

They did control a bit for that; the control group saw a "blank square", according to the actual journal article [sagepub.com] .

Not entirely sure what "blank" means, but they were generally being shown a screen full of flashing lights: "participants reported that they had seen color blocks without any meaningful pattern".

Seems to me that they should at least have controlled for ANY logos, perhaps for a car rental company or just random corporate logos. It's not at all clear to me whether they've actually proven anything about "fast food logos" rather than complicated shapes in general.

I'm generally suspicious about subliminal programming experiments, and their failure to control for something that seems obvious to me makes me skeptical.

Flash Backs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31911798)

Is it possible that the people become impatient because of a previous experience at a fast food restraunt where it was a choice to get fast food to save time origonally but they fucked up the order, so you ended up spending twice as much time to fix the problem because some r-tard couldn't get a cheese burger done correctly so now you mind set is to make up for lost time.
A week later some one flashes that sign in front of you, and you remember that incident, become agitated or "impatient" and are now back in that frame of mind.
Much like not going to the grocery store when you hungry.

nonsense (1)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 4 years ago | (#31911918)

this has to be nonsense. Just because you see, oh look McDonalds,

Skewed Data (0)

global variable (1001472) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912022)

Obviously if you make someone think of food, they have a better chance of becoming hungry AND yes, that will make them impatient. Flash some images of food and I bet you'll end up with similar outcomes.

Conspiracy theory (1)

Undead NDR (1252916) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912370)

To me, the most disturbing thing that this research seems to suggest is that subliminal frames actually work.

Since this stuff was dissed as ineffective by a whole lot of sources I'd read in the past, I now wonder if there is some kind of conspiracy going on: false news on the ineffectiveness of subliminal messages being spread by the very people who seek to manipulate the general public through the media.

Re:Conspiracy theory (1)

h00manist (800926) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912782)

I'd say both. Ignorance plays a large part in the general confusion, but also puppet masters. Fools just tell their truth, liars insist on their truth. Then there's the liar good enough to fool the wise.

Re:Conspiracy theory (1)

radtea (464814) | more than 4 years ago | (#31913154)

To me, the most disturbing thing that this research seems to suggest is that subliminal frames actually work.

Since the reasoning power of the average reader is shown by the summary's entirely unjustified statement, "So, basically, driving past a McDonald's on the highway... will make you more likely to buy two-for-one Pantene Pro-V Shampoo and Conditioner the next time you go to Duane Reade" I don't see that there's any point in going after the other falsehoods implied the study.

People are both innumerate and what I call "probability blind", which is like colour-blindness but for the way chance actually works. Thus, a study that concludes there is a tiny but objectively real positive effect that is statisically significant is interpreted by the average person to mean that the effect is universal, powerful and enternal, so if you walked past a McD's as a child you are more likely to pull and gun and shoot someone as an eighty-year-old.

I'm almost at that point in life where I'm going to stop trying to explain this kind of error to people, and instead go off and start taking money from them on the basis of their ignorance...

Re:Conspiracy theory (1)

Comboman (895500) | more than 4 years ago | (#31913606)

As I understand it, the studies showed that subliminal advertising wasn't effective, but that doesn't necessarily mean that subliminal communication isn't happening. Most advertising is about distinguishing your brand from your competitor, not about creating demand. If I flash a McDonald's logo at someone and they feel hungry and go to Wendy's, I've failed as an advertiser, despite that fact that something is clearly being communicated.

Re:Conspiracy theory (1)

Smauler (915644) | more than 4 years ago | (#31914746)

Some of these images were flashed for up to 80ms.... that seems like far from subliminal to me. If you're not noticing an image in from of you for almost 1/10th of a second, you've got bigger problems than a fast food short attention span association.

Hungry (1)

SuperManIsGod (1546053) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912392)

I think if I had fast food logos flashed in front of me I would be hungry or more likely to buy fast food. I don't think it would have any influence on any other type of product I would buy. Could it be that the test subjects were more likely to buy the 3-in-1 skin treatment because that image was flashed in front of them or maybe because it was a more convenient purchase. Maybe it was the skin treatment they already bought.

Everybody Loves Hypnotoad (1)

srobert (4099) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912434)

Yeah, right. I have a logo that will subconsciously make your customers cough up their entire bank account on what ever kind of crap you want to sell them. We've been working on this at McMahon and Tate for 50 years. We've almost got it perfected. And it can be yours if the price is right.

So McDonald's is bad for mental health, too... (1)

h00manist (800926) | more than 4 years ago | (#31912594)

I would never imagine that was the reason fast-food chains tend to be featured in movies like falling down [imdb.com]

Any Graphic Designers want to weigh in? (1)

imgumbydamnit (730663) | more than 4 years ago | (#31914224)

As much as I enjoy the usual /. digressions, I'd love to get an analysis from anyone who designs logos for a living. I'm not a designer, but I do notice few things that the logos have in common: Most of them have either text or design elements that rise to the upper-right of the logo. Most have some sort of pointer, either arrows (Subway), a slashing underline (Pizza Hut), meteor (Burger King), italics(KFC, Pizza Hut, Subway). Most use primary colors exclusively. Are these elements standard idioms in logo design? Are they universal, or are they specific to North American branding?

Re:Any Graphic Designers want to weigh in? (1)

imgumbydamnit (730663) | more than 4 years ago | (#31914266)

... Do the designs, rather than the products they hawk, contribute to the feelings of haste? What would happen if one tested with a logo design with these types of elements, but for a fictional brand?

Re:Any Graphic Designers want to weigh in? (1)

KharmaWidow (1504025) | more than 4 years ago | (#31914344)

I'm a graphic designer and the only aspect I think might influence the viewer is color. What they need are additional studies - sit-down restaurants, non-restaurants, logos that aren't generally reds and yellows, logos the viewer is not familiar with....

Maybe its simply having crap flash in your face...

Considering that the subliminal-message studies of the 60s or whenever were a hoax, I think this a bunch of hooey.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?