The science on front-of-package food labels

Self Cite

Objective: Energy (calorie) ranges currently appear on menu boards for customized menu items and will likely appear throughout the USA when menu-labelling legislation is implemented. Consumer welfare advocates have questioned whether energy ranges enable accurate energy estimates. In four studies, we examined: (i) whether energy range information improves energy estimation accuracy; (ii) whether misestimates persist because consumers misinterpret the meaning of the energy range end points; and (iii) whether energy estimates can be made more accurate by providing explicit information about the contents of items at the end points. Design: Four studies were conducted, all randomized experiments. Setting: Study 1 took place outside a Chipotle restaurant. Studies 2 to 4 took place online. Subjects: Participants in study 1 were customers exiting a Chipotle restaurant (n 306). Participants in studies 2 (n 205), 3 (n 290) and 4 (n 874) were from an online panel. Results: Energy ranges reduced energy misestimation across different menu items (studies 1-4). One cause of remaining misestimation was misinterpretation of the low end point's meaning (study 2). Providing explicit information about the contents of menu items associated with energy range end points further reduced energy misestimation (study 3) across different menu items (study 4). Conclusions: Energy range information improved energy estimation accuracy and defining the meaning of the end points further improved accuracy. We suggest that when restaurants present energy range information to consumers, they should explicitly define the meaning of the end points.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

‘How many calories are in my burrito?’ Improving consumers’ understanding of energy (calorie) range information

Liu

Bettman

Uhalde

et al. 2014

Self Cite

“…The outcome is a failure born of a highly destructive mismatch between the complex mechanics of the label systems themselves and the simple non-cognitive mechanisms via which they are actually processed by the consumers with whom they are supposed to be communicating. It would thus appear that the misgivings with regard to the performance of these two FOP nutritional label formats expressed by Hawley et al (2) , Lachat and Tseng (8) and others may be well founded. Their recommendation that further research is needed to test the performance of these labels in their current form, and that of potentially more effective alternatives to them, before any move to compulsory introduction is made is also supported.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

The impact of front-of-pack nutrition labels on consumer product evaluation and choice: an experimental study

Hamlin

McNeill

Moore

2014

Objective: The present research was an experimental test that aimed to quantify the impact of two dominant front-of-pack (FOP) nutritional label formats on consumer evaluations of food products that carried them. The two FOP label types tested were the traffic light label and the Percentage Daily Intake. Design: A 4 × 5 partially replicated Latin square design was used that allowed the impact of the FOP labels to be isolated from the effects of the product and the consumers who were performing the evaluations. Setting: The experiment was conducted on campus at the University of Otago, New Zealand. Subjects: The participants were 250 university students selected at random who met qualifying criteria of independent living and regular purchase of the products used in the research. They were not aware of the purpose of the research. Results: The presence of FOP labels led to significant and positive changes in consumer purchase intentions towards the products that carried them. These changes were not affected by the nature of FOP labels used, their size or the product nutritional status (good/bad) that they were reporting. Conclusions: The result is consistent with the participants paying attention to the FOP label and then using it as an adimensional cue indicating product desirability. As such, it represents a complete functional failure of both of these FOP label types in this specific instance. This result supports calls for further research on the performance of these FOP labels before any move to compulsory deployment is made.

“…Such information can operate in several ways, including influencing the purchase of nutritious foods (12) (e.g. buying a product labelled as containing high protein), influencing avoidance of less healthy foods (13) (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of a supermarket nutrition rating system on purchases of nutritious and less nutritious foods

Cawley

Sweeney

Sobal

et al. 2014

Objective: The current study examines the impact of a nutrition rating system on consumers' food purchases in supermarkets. Design: Aggregate sales data for 102 categories of food (over 60 000 brands) on a weekly basis for 2005-2007 from a supermarket chain of over 150 stores are analysed. Change in weekly sales of nutritious and less nutritious foods, after the introduction of a nutrition rating system on store shelves, is calculated, controlling for seasonality and time trends in sales. Setting: One hundred and sixty-eight supermarket stores in the north-east USA, from January 2005 to December 2007. Subjects: Consumers purchasing goods at the supermarket chain during the study period. Results: After the introduction of the nutrition ratings, overall weekly food sales declined by an average of 3637 units per category (95 % CI -5961, -1313; P < 0·01). Sales of less nutritious foods fell by 8·31 % (95 % CI -13·50, -2·80 %; P = 0·004), while sales of nutritious foods did not change significantly (P = 0·21); as a result, the percentage of food purchases rated as nutritious rose by 1·39 % (95 % CI 0·58, 2·20 %; P < 0·01). The decrease in sales of less nutritious foods was greatest in the categories of canned meat and fish, soda pop, bakery and canned vegetables. Conclusions: The introduction of the nutrition ratings led shoppers to buy a more nutritious mix of products. Interestingly, it did so by reducing purchases of less nutritious foods rather than by increasing purchases of nutritious foods. In evaluating nutrition information systems, researchers should focus on the entire market basket, not just sales of nutritious foods.