The Best of Both Worlds? Effects of Attribute-Induced Goal Conflict on Consumption of Healthful Indulgences

Belei, Nina; Geyskens, Kelly; Goukens, Caroline; Ramanathan, Suresh; Lemmink, J.G.A.M.

doi:10.1509/jmr.10.0155

Cited by 89 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Conducted in a laboratory.243 participants.One-way ANOVA (continuous variables). Chi-squared tests (categorical outcomes). Belei (2012) [31]The Netherlands.Randomised controlled experiment, between groups design, 3 conditions (incl. With/without claim).109 undergraduate students.ANOVA. Carbonneau (2015) [32]Canada.Randomised controlled experiment, between groups design, 3 conditions (low fat, energy, no claim), take home meals.160 women.Mixed models for repeated measures used to compare impact of the experimental labelling groups on mean daily energy intake. Koenigstorfer (2013) [40]Germany.Study 2: 1 factorial experiment (with claim/without) but without being made aware of perceived serving size and not observed by interviewer, conducted in a University.Study 2: 135 students.ANOVA. Steenhuis (2010) [53]The Netherlands.Repeated measures: two conditions: with claim/without claim, 1 week washout period between.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There were nine experiments that involved participants rating, on a Likert scale, their intention to purchase or consume products [25, 26, 34, 41, 43, 46, 50–52], and six experiments that involved measuring how much participants consumed under different claim conditions [14, 31, 32, 40, 52, 53]. A single study used sales data to measure the effect of health-related claims [39].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There was one study that measured the effects of health-related claims on ‘Fruits and Vegetables’ [48] whereas there were nine studies that examined ‘Foods High in Fat and/or Sugar’ [26, 31, 33, 35, 38–40, 42, 53], five studies examined ‘Beans, Pulses, Fish, Eggs, Meat and other Proteins’ [37, 44, 47, 50, 54], three studies on ‘Potatoes, Bread, Rice, Pasta and Other Starchy Carbohydrates’ [34, 46, 52], four studies on ‘Dairy and Alternatives’ [27, 36, 45, 51], and two studied ready meals [32, 41]. Six studies looked at multiple categories of foods [14, 25, 28–30, 49].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A systematic review, and meta-analyses, of the impact of health-related claims on dietary choices

Kaur

Scarborough

Rayner

2017

Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act

156

166

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHealth-related claims are statements regarding the nutritional content of a food (nutrition claims) and/or indicate that a relationship exists between a food and a health outcome (health claims). Their impact on food purchasing or consumption decisions is unclear. This systematic review measured the effect of health-related claims, on pre-packaged foods in retail settings, on adult purchasing decisions (real and perceived).MethodsIn September 2016, we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, CAB abstracts, Business Source Complete, and Web of Science/Science Citation Index & Social Science Citation Index for articles in English published in peer-review journals. Studies were included if they were controlled experiments where the experimental group(s) included a health-related claim and the control group involved an identical product without a health-related claim. Included studies measured (at an individual or population level); actual or intended choice, purchases, and/or consumption. The primary outcome was product choices and purchases, the secondary outcome was food consumption and preference. Results were standardised through calculating odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the likelihood of choosing a product when a health-related claim was present. Results were combined in a random-effects meta-analysis.ResultsThirty-one papers were identified, 17 of which were included for meta-analyses. Most studies were conducted in Europe (n = 17) and the USA (n = 7). Identified studies were choice experiments that measured the likelihood of a product being chosen when a claim was present compared to when a claim was not present, (n = 16), 15 studies were experiments that measured either; intent-rating scale outcomes (n = 8), consumption (n = 6), a combination of the two (n = 1), or purchase data (n = 1). Overall, 20 studies found that claims increase purchasing and/or consumption, eight studies had mixed results, and two studies found consumption/purchasing reductions. The meta-analyses of 17 studies found that health-related claims increase consumption and/or purchasing (OR 1.75, CI 1.60–1.91). ConclusionHealth-related claims have a substantial effect on dietary choices. However, this finding is based on research mostly conducted in artificial settings. Findings from natural experiments have yielded smaller effects. Further research is needed to assess effects of claims in real-world settings.Trial registrationPROSPERO systematic review registration number: CRD42016044042.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12966-017-0548-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A systematic review, and meta-analyses, of the impact of health-related claims on dietary choices

Kaur

Scarborough

Rayner

2017

Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act

156

166

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The classification of a product as hedonic or utilitarian may depend on product attribute perceptions, which may be assessed empirically (Antonides & Cramer, ; Cramer & Antonides, ). There are products such as the “healthful indulgencies” that combine pleasure with healthful benefits and simultaneously satisfy consumers' hedonic and utilitarian goals (e.g., Belei et al, ). We remind our reader that the product categories in Study 1 were perceived as either hedonic or utilitarian.…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Does variety seeking vary between hedonic and utilitarian products? The role of attribute type

Baltas

Kokkinaki

Λουκοπούλου

2017

J of Consumer Behaviour

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this paper is to consider attributes that stimulate variety seeking in hedonic and utilitarian product categories and examine the interaction of product category and attribute type on variety‐seeking behaviour. The results of 3 studies indicate that in hedonic product categories, consumers seek more variety in sensory attributes, whereas in utilitarian product categories, they seek more variety in functional attributes. This interaction effect is explained by the fact that the satiation rates of sensory and functional attributes depend on the nature of the product category. In product categories, which are not clearly hedonic or utilitarian, this interaction effect is not evident. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

show abstract

“…A straightforward choice for marketers is to use package design elements that explicitly communicate healthfulness, such as nutrition labels, health claims, and nutritional claims. Earlier literature investigates the impact that such explicit package design elements have on caloric estimation (Chandon & Wansink, ), health‐related inferences (Ford, Hastak, Mitra, & Ringold, ; Garretson & Burton, ; Kozup, Creyer, & Burton, ; Lähteenmäki, ; Roe, Levy, & Derby, ), consumption guilt (Mohr, Lichtenstein, & Janiszewski, ), food choice (Aschemann‐Witzel, Maroscheck, & Hamm, ; Mohr et al, ; Van Kleef, van Trijp, & Luning, ), and consumption (Belei, Geyskens, Goukens, Ramanathan, & Lemmink, ; Chandon & Wansink, ; Mohr et al, ). The consensus that stems from these studies is that explicit package design elements influence perceived product healthfulness, as well as food choice and consumption.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit communication of food product healthfulness through package design: A content analysis

Festila

Chrysochou

2018

J of Consumer Behaviour

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do food companies use package design to communicate healthfulness? The present study addresses this question by investigating the most typical implicit package design elements used by food companies for their health‐positioned food products. Using a content analysis on the packaging design of 12 food product categories across two countries (Denmark and the United States), our findings indicate that (a) implicit package design elements (colors, imagery, material, and shape) differ between health‐positioned and regular products, and (b) these differences are product category specific rather than universal. Our results contribute to knowledge on how package design is used as a health communication tool.

show abstract

The Best of Both Worlds? Effects of Attribute-Induced Goal Conflict on Consumption of Healthful Indulgences

Cited by 89 publications

References 27 publications

A systematic review, and meta-analyses, of the impact of health-related claims on dietary choices

A systematic review, and meta-analyses, of the impact of health-related claims on dietary choices

Does variety seeking vary between hedonic and utilitarian products? The role of attribute type

Implicit communication of food product healthfulness through package design: A content analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About