Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Effectiveness of Front-of-pack Nutrition Symbols: A Pilot Study with Consumers

Authors: Teri E, Emrich; Julio E, Mendoza; Mary R, L'Abbé;

Effectiveness of Front-of-pack Nutrition Symbols: A Pilot Study with Consumers

Abstract

Purpose: The effectiveness of different front-of-pack nutrition rating systems and symbols (FOPS) has not been studied among Canadians. We pilot tested an online FOPS survey with consumers. Methods: Members of the Guelph Food Panel were randomly exposed to traffic light, Percent Daily Value, Health Check, and Smart Pick logos on mock food packages and were asked to rate the FOPS on a Likert-type scale. The FOPS were rated on consumers’ ability to understand them, credibility, and influence on purchase decisions. Participants also provided feedback on the survey. Results: Participants (n=337) deemed the survey appropriate in length and language, and provided suggestions for improving survey clarity. More than 50% of the respondents believed that FOPS should be present on all food packages (65.1%) and should be government regulated (53.0%). The Percent Daily Value symbol was rated highest with respect to liking, credibility, helpfulness, and influence, but was the least understood. When they used direct comparison, consumers preferred the traffic light symbol (53.1%) over the Percent Daily Value (40.0%), Health Check (6.7%), and Smart Pick (0.3%) symbols. Conclusions: The survey was revised as a result of the pilot study feedback. Preliminary findings from this pilot study suggest that consumers prefer a single, government-regulated symbol, and value more complex FOPS, like the Percent Daily Value symbol, despite finding them harder to understand.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Adult, Male, Ontario, Symbolism, Consumer Health Information, Urban Population, Decision Making, Pilot Projects, Consumer Behavior, Middle Aged, Nutrition Policy, Cohort Studies, Young Adult, Patient Education as Topic, Food Labeling, Surveys and Questionnaires, Humans, Female, Aged

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    12
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
12
Average
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!