You are not logged in.
Openly accessible

Do health claims and front-of-pack labels lead to a positivity bias in unhealthy foods?

Talati, Zenobia, Pettigrew, Simone, Dixon, Helen, Neal, Bruce, Ball, Kylie and Hughes, Clare 2016, Do health claims and front-of-pack labels lead to a positivity bias in unhealthy foods?, Nutrients, vol. 8, no. 12, pp. 1-18, doi: 10.3390/nu8120787.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads
ball-dohealthclaims-2016.pdf Published version application/pdf 2.84MB 16

Title Do health claims and front-of-pack labels lead to a positivity bias in unhealthy foods?
Author(s) Talati, Zenobia
Pettigrew, Simone
Dixon, Helen
Neal, Bruce
Ball, KylieORCID iD for Ball, Kylie orcid.org/0000-0003-2893-8415
Hughes, Clare
Journal name Nutrients
Volume number 8
Issue number 12
Start page 1
End page 18
Total pages 18
Publisher MDPI
Place of publication Basel, Switzerland
Publication date 2016
ISSN 2072-6643
Keyword(s) daily intake
front-of-pack labelling
health claims
health halo
health star rating
positivity bias
traffic lights
Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Nutrition & Dietetics
NUTRITION INFORMATION
CONSUMER PERCEPTIONS
PURCHASING BEHAVIOR
PRODUCT EVALUATION
NEW-ZEALAND
CHOICE
ATTITUDES
SYSTEMS
IMPACT
HEALTHFULNESS
Summary Health claims and front-of-pack labels (FoPLs) may lead consumers to hold more positive attitudes and show a greater willingness to buy food products, regardless of their actual healthiness. A potential negative consequence of this positivity bias is the increased consumption of unhealthy foods. This study investigated whether a positivity bias would occur in unhealthy variations of four products (cookies, corn flakes, pizzas and yoghurts) that featured different health claim conditions (no claim, nutrient claim, general level health claim, and higher level health claim) and FoPL conditions (no FoPL, the Daily Intake Guide (DIG), Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), and the Health Star Rating (HSR)). Positivity bias was assessed via measures of perceived healthiness, global evaluations (incorporating taste, quality, convenience, etc.) and willingness to buy. On the whole, health claims did not produce a positivity bias, while FoPLs did, with the DIG being the most likely to elicit this bias. The HSR most frequently led to lower ratings of unhealthy foods than the DIG and MTL, suggesting that this FoPL has the lowest risk of creating an inaccurate positivity bias in unhealthy foods.
Language eng
DOI 10.3390/nu8120787
Field of Research 111104 Public Nutrition Intervention
1111 Nutrition And Dietetics
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, The Authors
Free to Read? Yes
Use Rights Creative Commons Attribution licence
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30090515

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

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.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 76 Abstract Views, 17 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Wed, 11 Jan 2017, 09:17:57 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.