Testing consumer perception of nutrient content claims using conjoint analysis

Nutritional Sciences Program and Center for Public Health Nutrition, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Box 353410, Seattle, WA 98195-3410, USA.
Public Health Nutrition (Impact Factor: 2.68). 05/2010; 13(5):688-94. DOI: 10.1017/S1368980009993119
Source: PubMed


The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposes to establish standardized and mandatory criteria upon which front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition labelling must be based. The present study aimed to estimate the relative contribution of declared amounts of different nutrients to the perception of the overall 'healthfulness' of foods by the consumer.
Protein, fibre, vitamin A, vitamin C, calcium and iron were nutrients to encourage. Total fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, total and added sugar, and sodium were the nutrients to limit. Two content claims per nutrient used the FDA-approved language. An online consumer panel (n 320) exposed to multiple messages (n 48) rated the healthfulness of each hypothetical food product. Utility functions were constructed using conjoint analysis, based on multiple logistic regression and maximum likelihood estimation.
Consumer perception of healthfulness was most strongly driven by the declared presence of protein, fibre, calcium and vitamin C and by the declared total absence of saturated fat and sodium. For this adult panel, total and added sugar had lower utilities and contributed less to the perception of healthfulness. There were major differences between women and men.
Conjoint analysis can lead to a better understanding of how consumers process information about the full nutrition profile of a product, and is a powerful tool for the testing of nutrient content claims. Such studies can help the FDA develop science-based criteria for nutrient profiling that underlies FOP and shelf labelling.

Download full-text


Available from: Howard Moskowitz, Sep 03, 2015
  • Source
    • "Conjoint analysis is a method used to evaluate the importance individuals assign to various attributes of a product (Green & Srinivasan, 1978). Several studies have employed conjoint analysis to show the effect the trade-offs between health or nutrition claims and sensory or non-sensory factors have on consumers' preferences for choosing a product or determining its healthfulness (Annunziata & Vecchio, 2013; Ares, Gimenez, & Deliza, 2010; Ares, Gimenez, & Gambaro, 2009; Bech-Larsen & Grunert, 2003; Dean et al., 2012; Drewnowski, Moskowitz, Reisner, & Krieger, 2010; Johansen, Naes, Oyaas, & Hersleth, 2010). The conjoint analysis design entailed four product attributes – two different claims (probiotic and fat metabolism claims), content of sugars and fat, as shown in Table 1. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The use of health claims on foods with a poor nutritional composition could pose a risk of misleading some groups of consumers in their food choices. This study aimed to explore the influence of the use of claims on consumers’ preferences for yoghurts with a different nutritional composition and the influence of more and less familiar claims on food choices. The study was conducted on 371 consumers using conjoint methodology and further cluster analysis. Fruit yoghurt was used as a base product. We investigated the impact of the following product attributes on consumers’ preferences: presence/absence of a probiotic and fat metabolism claim; sugar content; and fat content. The results suggest that, while consumers generally consider the nutritional composition of yoghurt to be more important than the tested claims, some groups of consumers are more sensitive to the use of health-related statements. We observed the consumers’ generally positive preference for a familiar probiotic claim, and their negative preference for a non-familiar fat metabolism claim. Overall, these results indicate that some groups of consumers are more sensitive to the use of health-related communications and are therefore more exposed to the risk of being misled if the composition of the yoghurt they buy is in fact less favourable. It would be beneficial if nutrient profiles were introduced to limit the use of claims on foods.
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2015 · Food Quality and Preference
  • Source
    • "Currently, the Nutrition Facts panel lists total sugars and does not distinguish between added and natural sugars so consumers would have to read and understand the ingredients list to identify sources of added sugars in foods and beverages. A previous study suggested that food label claims on a hypothetical food product concerning added and total sugar content were not rated as important as other label claims, including those related to protein, sodium, saturated fat, fiber, or certain vitamins or minerals [18]. Consumer messages developed as part of USDA's MyPlate recommend drinking water instead of sugary drinks [19], so consumer perceptions of the beverages that they consider to be sugary drinks are important. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Key recommendations in the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans and US Department of Agriculture's MyPlate are to reduce the intake of added sugars, particularly from sugar-sweetened beverages, and drink water instead of "sugary" beverages. However, little is known about consumer knowledge, perceptions, and behaviors regarding sugars in beverages. We hypothesized that consumers would have limited or inaccurate knowledge of the sugars in beverages and that their beverage consumption behaviors would not reflect their primary concerns related to sugars in beverages. An online survey was completed by 3361 adults 18 years and older residing throughout the United States. Water was consumed in the highest amounts followed by (in descending amounts) other beverages (includes coffee and tea), added sugar beverages, milk, diet drinks, and 100% fruit juice and blends. Participants primarily associated the term "sugary" with beverages containing added sugars; however, almost 40% identified 100% fruit juice as sugary. Some participants misidentified the types of sugars in beverages, particularly with respect to milk and 100% fruit juices. Generally, beverage choices were consistent with stated concerns about total, added, or natural sugars; however, less than 40% of participants identified added sugars as a primary concern when choosing beverages despite public health recommendations to reduce the intake of added sugars and sugar-sweetened beverages. Results suggest that there may be a considerable level of consumer misunderstanding or confusion about the types of sugars in beverages. More consumer research and education are needed with the goal of helping consumers make more informed and healthy beverage choices.
    Full-text · Article · Feb 2014 · Nutrition research
  • Source

    Preview · Article · Jan 2011
Show more