Document Type

Article

Publication Date

Fall 2011

Source Publication

Journal of Public Policy & Marketing

Source ISSN

0743-9156

Abstract

Consumers of packaged goods products in the United States recently have faced an onslaught of front-of-package (FOP) nutrition symbols and icons, including the controversial “Smart Choices” single summary indicator. In a between-subjects experiment with 520 adult consumers, the authors compare effects of the Smart Choices (SC) icon, the more complex Traffic Light–Guideline Daily Amounts (TLGDAs) icon, and a no-FOP icon control for a nutritionally moderate food that qualifies for the SC icon. Drawing from principles of heuristic processing and halo effects, the authors predict and find that the SC icon can lead to positive (and potentially misleading) nutrient evaluations and product healthfulness when compared with the TL-GDA icon or no-FOP icon control. When the Nutrition Facts Panel is not available, the TL-GDA icon results in substantially greater nutrition accuracy scores than with the SC icon or control. The authors also find that nutrition consciousness is more likely to moderate effects related to the Nutrition Facts Panel than the FOP nutrition icon information. Implications are offered for public health officials, nutrition researchers, and food manufacturers, as the Food and Drug Administration considers FOP nutrition alternatives for use in the United States.

Comments

Published version. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, Vol. 30, No. 2 (Fall 2011): 175-190. DOI. © 2011 American Marketing Association. Used with permission.

Download

Included in

Marketing Commons

Share

COinS