↓ Skip to main content

Double Up Food Bucks program effects on SNAP recipients' fruit and vegetable purchases

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Double Up Food Bucks program effects on SNAP recipients' fruit and vegetable purchases
Published in
BMC Public Health, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4942-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie Steele-Adjognon, Dave Weatherspoon

Abstract

To encourage the consumption of more fresh fruits and vegetables, the 2014 United Sates Farm Bill allocated funds to the Double Up Food Bucks Program. This program provided Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program beneficiaries who spent $10 on fresh fruits and vegetables, in one transaction, with a $10 gift card exclusively for Michigan grown fresh fruits and vegetables. This study analyzes how fruit and vegetable expenditures, expenditure shares, variety and purchase decisions were affected by the initiation and conclusion, as well as any persistent effects of the program. Changes in fruit and vegetable purchase behaviors due to Double Up Food Bucks in a supermarket serving a low-income, predominantly Hispanic community in Detroit, Michigan were evaluated using a difference in difference fixed effects estimation strategy. We find that the Double Up Food Bucks program increased vegetable expenditures, fruit and vegetable expenditure shares, and variety of fruits and vegetables purchased but the effects were modest and not sustainable without the financial incentive. Fruit expenditures and the fruit and vegetable purchase decision were unaffected by the program. This study provides valuable insight on how a nutrition program influences a low-income, urban, Hispanic community's fruit and vegetable purchase behavior. Policy recommendations include either removing or lowering the purchase hurdle for incentive eligibility and dropping the Michigan grown requirement to better align with the customers' preferences for fresh fruits and vegetables.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 94 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 21%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 12%
Professor 4 4%
Student > Bachelor 4 4%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 30 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 19 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 6%
Environmental Science 5 5%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 33 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 May 2023.
All research outputs
#7,295,277
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,672
of 14,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,689
of 439,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#122
of 196 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,991 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 439,142 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 196 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.