Skip to main content

Table 4 Event-sponsor fit perceptions of sponsor brands by sponsorship condition

From: The impact of unhealthy food sponsorship vs. pro-health sponsorship models on young adults’ food preferences: a randomised controlled trial

  Unhealthy food sponsor brand Healthier food sponsor brand Obesity prevention campaign sponsor brand
Sponsorship condition Predicted mean B (95% CI) β p Predicted mean B (95% CI) β p Predicted mean B (95% CI) β p
Non-food branding 3.29 Ref    4.62 Ref    4.70 Ref   
Unhealthy food branding 3.90 0.61 (0.36, 0.86) 0.16 < 0.001 4.70 0.08 (−0.15, 0.31) 0.02 0.494 4.72 0.02 (−0.22, 0.25) 0.01 0.872
Healthier food branding 3.66 0.37 (0.12, 0.62) 0.09 0.004 5.10 0.48 (0.25, 0.72) 0.14 < 0.001 4.77 0.07 (−0.16, 0.31) 0.02 0.539
Obesity prevention campaign branding 3.58 0.29 (0.04, 0.54) 0.07 0.023 4.73 0.12 (−0.11, 0.35) 0.04 0.316 5.19 0.49 (0.25, 0.73) 0.14 < 0.001
  1. B unstandardised regression coefficient, CI confidence interval, β standardised regression coefficient, Ref reference category in linear regression model. Linear regression analyses included product category as a covariate. Boldfaced results are significant at p < 0.05