Literature DB >> 1401661

More effective nutrition label formats are not necessarily preferred.

A S Levy1, S B Fein, R E Schucker.   

Abstract

An experimental design was used to compare performance and preference for five nutrition label formats. Four performance measures--accuracy and false-positives in identifying nutrient differences, time required, and correctness in judging which product was more nutritious--were derived from a product-comparison task. A sample of 1,460 food shoppers over 18 years old was recruited by a shopping mall-intercept method. Results of the study demonstrated that preferences and performance do not necessarily agree. The Control format, which had no nutrition profile information, performed the best but was liked the least. The Adjectival format, which provided nutrition profile information in the form of descriptive adjectives, was the most preferred. Results also showed that listing Daily Reference Values or nutrition profile aids increased preference but either did not affect performance or decreased it, depending on the specific aid and performance measure. Formats that some subjects liked for having adequate information others disliked for being hard to use. Formats that some subjects liked for being easy to use others disliked for having inadequate information. Age, education, and race were related to all of the performance measures except judgment of relative nutrition. Only gender was related to preference. Results of the study are useful as guidance for the development of consumer education materials.

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1401661

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Diet Assoc        ISSN: 0002-8223


  2 in total

1.  Making healthy food choices using nutrition facts panels. The roles of knowledge, motivation, dietary modifications goals, and age.

Authors:  Lisa M Soederberg Miller; Diana L Cassady
Journal:  Appetite       Date:  2012-04-21       Impact factor: 3.868

2.  Communicating Benefit and Risk Information in Direct-to-Consumer Print Advertisements: A Randomized Study.

Authors:  Helen W Sullivan; Amie C O'Donoghue; Kathryn J Aikin
Journal:  Ther Innov Regul Sci       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 1.778

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.