The influence of front‐of‐pack nutrition information on consumers’ portion size perceptions

Abstract

Issue addressed Portion size guidance strategies have been suggested as an important component of weight management; therefore, the Health Star Rating (HSR) front‐of‐pack labels could influence consumers’ portion‐size decisions. However, this has not been investigated to date. This study aims to evaluate whether presenting energy content information and HSRs influences portion size self‐selection of specific foods and meals. Methods Adults were randomly assigned to one of three experimental groups in this randomised controlled experiment. Each participant was given either a kJ/100 g food label or a HSR label, or was given no information on nutrient composition. They were then asked to serve themselves an adequate portion of breakfast cereal (Kellogg’s Nutri‐Grain), fruit salad and chocolate, plus a three‐component meal (chicken, fries and mixed vegetables). Portion serves and meal weights were compared between each experimental group using ANOVA and the discretionary foods were also compared with the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating (AGHE). Results Neither the kilojoule nor HSR information influenced the self‐served portion size of foods or meal components. Mean self‐served portion size of the discretionary foods were significantly greater than the standard serving sizes as specified in the AGHE. Conclusion Although food labels have the potential to assist consumers in making product choices, this study indicates that presenting nutrition information does not affect portion size decisions in young adults. So what? Strategies that assist consumers to choose appropriate portion sizes should be developed as a weight management tool.

Can front-of-pack labels influence portion size judgements for unhealthy foods?

“…A recent review reported mixed findings from a number of studies examining whether the MTL, Guideline Daily Amount or labels containing only serving size information reduced, increased or did not affect consumption ( 20 ) . Another recent study of young adults tested the effect of two label types (an energy-only label and the HSR) and found no significant differences in participants’ food selection behaviours ( 21 ) . More studies testing a wider range of FOP labels in more diverse samples are needed to assess whether FOP labels can influence portion sizes, particularly for unhealthy variants of commonly consumed foods.…”

Impact of Front-of-Pack Nutrition Labels on Portion Size Selection: An Experimental Study in a French Cohort

“…Though information on the recommended portion size for a product (in particular using pictorials) appears to help consumers select an appropriate amount to eat [ 23 , 24 , 25 ], the scientific literature on the effect of FoPL on portion size perception, such as ours, is very limited. A study investigated the impact of the Health Star Rating system (HSR, a summary FoPL implemented in Australia and New Zealand), compared to an energy only label on portion size in young adults, and reported no significant differences in portion size selection [ 15 ]. Another study which compared the effects of the HSR, the Daily Intake Guide label, and MTL on portion size selection, observed a small effect of the HSR to reduce portion size for cornflakes and pizzas only, and an effect of MTL to decrease selected portion sizes for cornflakes only [ 17 ], compared to no label.…”

“…Very few studies have investigated the impact of FoP nutritional labelling on portion size selection [ 15 , 16 , 17 ], while a review has suggested that they may modify the perception of consumers of the nutritional quality of products, and then lead to “halo” effect, influencing the quantities consumed [ 18 ]. Indeed, misinterpretations of the actual nutritional content of a food may lead consumers towards larger portions and overconsumption of less healthy foods [ 19 ].…”

Oncogenesis as a Selective Force: Adaptive Evolution in the Face of a Transmissible Cancer

“…During the last $3000 years devils have been restricted to the island State of Tasmania. [49] Presently, however, devils have become exposed to a novel threat, a transmissible cancer, DFTD. [50,51] First reported at wukalina/Mount William National Park in north-eastern Tasmania in 1996, DFTD has caused declines in devil numbers of up to 90% in some areas of Tasmania and as a result the species has been listed as Endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN red list).…”