You are not logged in.

Consumers' responses to front-of-pack labels that vary by interpretive content

Talati, Zenobia, Pettigrew, Simone, Kelly, Bridget, Ball, Kylie, Dixon, Helen and Shilton, Trevor 2016, Consumers' responses to front-of-pack labels that vary by interpretive content, Appetite, vol. 101, pp. 205-213, doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2016.03.009.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Consumers' responses to front-of-pack labels that vary by interpretive content
Author(s) Talati, Zenobia
Pettigrew, Simone
Kelly, Bridget
Ball, KylieORCID iD for Ball, Kylie orcid.org/0000-0003-2893-8415
Dixon, Helen
Shilton, Trevor
Journal name Appetite
Volume number 101
Start page 205
End page 213
Total pages 9
Publisher Elsevier
Place of publication London, Eng.
Publication date 2016-06-01
ISSN 1095-8304
Keyword(s) daily intake guide
front of pack
health star
nutrition label
traffic light
Summary Previous research has shown that front-of-pack labels (FoPLs) can assist people to make healthier food choices if they are easy to understand and people are motivated to use them. There is some evidence that FoPLs providing an assessment of a food's health value (evaluative FoPLs) are easier to use than those providing only numerical information on nutrients (reductive FoPLs). Recently, a new evaluative FoPL (the Health Star Rating (HSR)) has been introduced to Australia and New Zealand. The HSR features a summary indicator, differentiating it from many other FoPLs being used around the world. The aim of this study was to understand how consumers of all ages use and make sense of reductive FoPLs and evaluative FoPLs including evaluative FoPLs with and without summary indicators. Ten focus groups were conducted in Perth, Western Australia with adults (n = 50) and children aged 10–17 years (n = 35) to explore reactions to one reductive FoPL (the Daily Intake Guide), an existing evaluative FoPL (multiple traffic lights), and a new evaluative FoPL (the HSR). Participants preferred the evaluative FoPLs over the reductive FoPL, with the strongest preference being for the FoPL with the summary indicator (HSR). Discussions revealed the cognitive strategies used when interpreting each FoPL (e.g., using cut offs, heuristics, and the process of elimination), which differed according to FoPL format. Most participants reported being motivated to use the evaluative FoPLs (particularly the HSR) to make choices about foods consumed as part of regular daily meals, but not for discretionary foods consumed as snacks or deserts. The findings provide further evidence of the potential utility of evaluative FoPLs in supporting healthy food choices and can assist policy makers in selecting between alternative FoPL formats.
Language eng
DOI 10.1016/j.appet.2016.03.009
Field of Research 111199 Nutrition and Dietetics not elsewhere classified
111799 Public Health and Health Services not elsewhere classified
Socio Economic Objective 920411 Nutrition
HERDC Research category C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
ERA Research output type C Journal article
Copyright notice ©2016, Elsevier
Free to Read? No
Free to Read Start Date 2018-07-01
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30082371

Document type: Journal Article
Collection: School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 6 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 6 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 92 Abstract Views, 2 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Mon, 11 Apr 2016, 13:30:27 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.