An objective examination of consumer perception of nutrition information based on healthiness ratings and eye movements

University of Derby, Derby, England, United Kingdom
Public Health Nutrition (Impact Factor: 2.48). 04/2007; 10(3):238-44. DOI: 10.1017/S1368980007258513
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Previous research on nutrition labelling has mainly used subjective measures. This study examines the effectiveness of two types of nutrition label using two objective measures: eye movements and healthiness ratings.
Eye movements were recorded while participants made healthiness ratings for two types of nutrition label: standard and standard plus the Food Standards Agency's 'traffic light' concept.
University of Derby, UK.
A total of 92 participants (mean age 31.5 years) were paid for their participation. None of the participants worked in the areas of food or nutrition.
For the standard nutrition label, participant eye movements lacked focus and their healthiness ratings lacked accuracy. The traffic light system helped to guide the attention of the consumer to the important nutrients and improved the accuracy of the healthiness ratings of nutrition labels.
Consumers have a lack of knowledge regarding how to interpret nutrition information for standard labels. The traffic light concept helps to ameliorate this problem by indicating important nutrients to which to pay attention.

1 Follower
  • Source
    British Food Journal 07/2014; 116(7). DOI:10.1108/BFJ-02-2013-0042 · 0.65 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Breakfast cereals substantially contribute to daily energy and nutrient intakes among children. In New Zealand, new regulations are being implemented to restrict nutrition and health claims to products that meet certain 'healthy' criteria. This study investigated the difference in nutritional quality, labelling and promotion between 'healthy' and 'less healthy' breakfast cereals, and between breakfast cereals intended for children compared with other breakfast cereals on the New Zealand market. The cross-sectional data collection involved taking pictures of the nutrition information panel (NIP) and front-of pack (FOP) for all breakfast cereals (n = 247) at two major supermarkets in Auckland in 2013. A nutrient profiling tool was used to classify products into 'healthy/less healthy'. In total 26% of cereals did not meet the 'healthy' criteria. 'Less healthy' cereals were significantly higher in energy density, sugar and sodium content and lower in protein and fibre content compared with 'healthy' cereals. Significantly more nutrition claims (75%) and health claims (89%) featured on 'healthy' compared with 'less healthy' cereals. On the 'less healthy' cereals, nutrition claims (65%) were more predominant than health claims (17%). Of the 52 products displaying promotional characters, 48% were for 'cereals for kids', and of those, 72% featured on 'less healthy' cereals. In conclusion, most breakfast cereals met the 'healthy' criteria; however, 'cereals for kids' were 'less healthy' and displayed more promotional characters than other cereal categories. Policy recommendations include: food composition targets set or endorsed by government, strengthening and enforcing current regulations on health and nutrition claims, considering the application of nutrient profiling for nutrition claims in addition to health claims, introducing an interpretative FoP labelling system and restricting the use of promotional characters on 'less healthy' breakfast cereals.
    Appetite 06/2014; 81. DOI:10.1016/j.appet.2014.06.019 · 2.52 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Three labeling schemes - signpost logos, multiple traffic light (MTL) labels, and labels communicating guideline daily amounts (GDA) - dominate the debate on front-of-pack nutrition labeling used to assist consumers in making informed food choices. Although the performance of these labeling schemes has been studied extensively, this has mainly been done with a focus on single labeling schemes within single countries where these labels have already a foothold in the market place. Such a priori familiarity raises issues regarding the generalization of results to other contexts and countries. The present study compares consumer evaluation of nutrition labeling schemes, product choices, and inferred product healthfulness across two markets (UK and the Netherlands) with different front-of-pack labeling histories. Results show that familiarity with the labeling scheme affects self-reported evaluations and usage intentions, but that all labeling schemes are equally effective in stimulating healthful choices. The study further shows evidence that all labels increase the perceived healthfulness of more healthful options and that only MTL and GDA reduce healthfulness perceptions of the less healthful options within an assortment. These results are a first step in further elucidating the underlying cognitive processes involved in consumer evaluation and use of front-of-pack nutrition labeling.
    Food Quality and Preference 10/2012; DOI:10.1016/j.foodqual.2012.03.003 · 2.73 Impact Factor


Available from
May 29, 2014