Search results

Nutrition and health claims are used widely on food labels and are known to influence food choice, however research has found that consumer perceptions of such claims are mixed. The study aimed to explore the perceptions, use and perceived value of nutrition and health claims among consumers and investigate barriers for the use of claims in guiding food choice.

An online cross-sectional survey conducted in May-July 2019 collected information on participant demographics, reported use and perceptions of nutrition and health claims, and barriers to the use of claims for 150 Australian consumers.

While the majority (73.5%) of respondents were aware of nutrition and health claims on food labels and were largely confident in interpreting claims, 29% of respondents “often” or “always” used claims to guide food choices. More than one-quarter (27.3%) of respondents found nutrition and health claims “not very useful” or “not at all useful” for guiding food choice, while only 12.7% perceived claims as “very trustworthy” or “extremely trustworthy”. The ingredients list and nutrition information panel were the preferred sources of on-pack nutrition information for guiding food choice.

Findings suggest there remains a role for nutrition and health claims to help consumers make healthier dietary decisions however, it appears that trust in claims and regulations must firstly be addressed. There is a need to develop strategies to increase the perceived trustworthiness of these claims, including clearer promotion of the current regulatory requirements for making nutrition and health claims.

The primary purpose is to examine the factors that affect the use of nutritional facts, nutrient content claims and health claims on food label use in the United Kingdom.

The paper reports the results of a survey of over 300 face‐to‐face interviews with shoppers of Asda, Morrisons and Sainsbury – three of the major supermarkets in the UK.

Product class involvement factors, individual characteristics, health‐related factors (nutritional knowledge, health locus of control, perceived need of dietary change), situational, attitudinal and behavioral factors were found to be significant factors affecting the use of nutritional information and nutritional and health claims on food labeling. While the use of nutritional information and health claims increases with the stated importance of “nutrition” and “family preferences”, it is less likely among shoppers for whom “taste” is an important driver of food purchasing behaviour. There is also evidence of mistrust in health claims, as indicated by the negative relationship between the consideration of such claims and the stated importance of “quality” and perceived need to “change dietary quality” – the more discerning shoppers are the least likely to consider health claims.

The study provides evidence that a wider range of product class involvement factors is necessary to predict the use of nutritional information and nutritional and health claims on food labeling. It also offers a conceptualization of health‐related factors to include health locus of control as a predictor of the acquisition of nutrition and health information.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the packaged food market in Brazil by examining the use of nutrition and health claims and marketing techniques, as well as the different levels of industrial food processing in relation to product category, nutrition information and price.

A survey was conducted on the labels of pre-packed foods and non-alcoholic beverages marketed in a home-shopping website in Brazil.

The authors showed that the use of nutrition and health claims on packaged foods in Brazil is widespread and varied across different food categories. Marketing techniques were also prevalent, and techniques emphasising general health, well-being or naturalness were the most frequent type used. Overall, products carrying nutrition and health claims and/or using marketing techniques had lower content of fat and higher content of fibre. However, the high prevalence of these strategies in ultra-processed foods is alarming. The presence of health claims and use of marketing techniques was not found to be an effective modifier of the three price measures. However, processed and ultra-processed foods were more expensive than unprocessed foods when considering price per energy and price per 100 g or mL.

These results indicate that there are clear opportunities to improve the packaged food environment in supermarkets. It is important to highlight the need to develop public policies to address these issues, including restriction of the promotion and advertising of unhealthy foods and beverages and use of warning labels.

The purpose of this paper is to review and compare the scientific and regulatory environments for nutrition and health claims on foodstuffs in the USA, Japan and the European Union.

A review of the literature and the relevant legislation in the three different countries is conducted. Regulations are reviewed and scientific evidence requirements are outlined in each country.

Full regulatory approval for claims across all three countries requires the support of robust scientific evidence. To obtain this, companies must submit comprehensive dossiers and detailed applications to the regulators with full descriptions of the tests and studies completed during product development. However in the USA and Japan, an alternative process exists. A health claim that is suggested but not supported by scientific evidence is known as a qualified health claim and is permitted in the USA and Japan, but not in the EU.

The paper demonstrates the difference in regulatory requirements in different countries which leads to different claims being permitted in different countries. It also leads to different levels of scientific support for similar claims which causes consumer confusion and develops an uneven playing pitch for the industry. Given that the industry operates in a global market place, it is imperative that a consensus is reached as to the level of scientific evidence required to approve a health claim. In that way, consumers can be safeguarded from being misled, consumer confusion will not be a concern and products can be globally distributed in line with the increasing liberalisation of trade.

This paper is of value to regulators and the food industry.

This research investigates the effectiveness of the four health claims that the European Union (EU) authorized for extra-virgin olive oil (EVOO) in terms of perceived text clarity, text interestingness, message credibility and information diagnosticity, along with the claims' effect on product attractiveness and consumers' purchase intention.

An experimental study with 185 participants investigated consumer response to the four claims. A one-way MANOVA analyzed differences in the aforementioned variables, while a sequential mediation model assessed the relationship among perceived text clarity of the EVOO health claims, information diagnosticity, product attractiveness and purchase intention.

The four EU-authorized health claims differ in terms of perceived text clarity, message credibility, information diagnosticity and product attractiveness. Specifically, the health claim on EVOO polyphenols scored lower than the other three health claims on the aforementioned dependent variables. Importantly, clearer health claims are perceived as more useful and may increase product attractiveness and consumers' purchase intention.

The research sheds light on the effectiveness of EVOO health claims. Since the use of such health claims is not a common practice in the EVOO market, a deeper understanding of consumers' perception and attitude toward them could inspire better guidelines and suggestions for claim usage and improvement.

Enormous variation exists internationally in the regulation of nutrition and health messages on the food label. For the consumer, the health claim on the label becomes a value‐added point of product differentiation. Therefore, for the food industry, access to a health claim is a key marketing variable. It is important to understand the role of the public policy process in establishing health claims as developing nations mature and choose an approval process to advance their own food regulatory environment. Their choice of approach, and the type of participants contributing to the process, will influence the type of health claim outcome and the latitude of marketing permitted on the food label. This paper identifies and compares the regulatory approaches, in effect in early 1977, used to establish health claims in Japan, Australia and the European Union. There does not seem to be a clear international “lead” nation regulatory model for health claims, and this suggests global economies of scale are elusive for product development and marketing based on health claims.

This study aims to examine the various effects of two licensing factors – health claims and “FoSHU seal”, which can be appeared on packages only with permission. In the Food for specified health uses (FoSHU) system, Japanese Government controls all health claims on packages of food products for the first time in the world.

In Study 1, the authors investigate the signaling effects of the two licensing factors with a 2 (health claims: yes/no) × 2 (FoSHU seal: yes/no) factorial design. Then, in Study 2, the authors investigate the external effects on alternative brands with a 2 (package of the non-FoSHU brand: similar/dissimilar to the FoSHU brand) × 2 (presentation of the FoSHU brand: yes/no) design.

The results show that food evaluations are affected by the FoSHU seal, indicating that, with the symbolic mark, FoSHU foods can be successfully differentiated from non-FoSHU foods. In contrast, food evaluations are not affected by health claims – health claims have external effects on evaluations of non-FoSHU products in the category if both FoSHU and non-FOSHU products have a similar package.

Although there are many studies regarding the impacts of health claims on food evaluations, they have assumed only US regulatory system and, therefore, have not examined the effects of licensing marks. Also, because Japanese approval system is dissimilar to US regulatory system, the effects of health claims in Japan are different from those in the USA. By analyzing various effects of Japanese system on consumer evaluation of food healthiness, this study contributes to a better understanding of the impacts of the public policy and food marketing on consumer behavior.

In a number of recent multi-billion dollar cases brought against cigarette manufacturers, plaintiffs have in part alleged that the cigarette manufacturers (1) conspired not to compete on the basis of health claims or the introduction of potentially safer cigarettes since the 1950s, and (2) engaged in fraudulent advertising by making implied health claims in advertisements selling ‘low tar’/‘light’ cigarettes. In this type of litigation, defendants’ actions could be due to alleged illegal behaviour as asserted by plaintiffs, or be the result of market forces that may have nothing to do with allegedly inappropriate acts. We examine the economic evidence relating to these allegations, taking into account some of the major influences on cigarette company behaviour. In particular, our analyses show that much of the cigarette manufactures’ behaviour can be explained by Federal Trade Commission and related government actions, rather than conspiracy or fraudulent acts. We find the economic evidence is inconsistent with an effective conspiracy to suppress information on either smoking and health or the development and marketing of potentially safer cigarettes. Regarding ‘lower tar’ and ‘light’ cigarettes, the economic evidence indicates that the cigarette manufacturers responded to government and public health initiatives, and that disclosing more information on smoking compensation earlier than the cigarette companies did would not have had any significant impact on smoking behaviour.

Milk and yoghurt provide essential sources of nutrition throughout the life cycle in the Irish diet. Health claims on dairy product labels were popular in the 1980s, and since the introduction of the nutrition and health claims (NHC) Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 in 2007, many new regulated claims have been used to communicate product benefits. Meanwhile, COVID-19 and the Farm to Fork strategy have heightened consumer awareness of health issues. All of these factors have contributed to a change in our food environment and interest in health. In addition, the European Commission is working to introduce a legislative proposal on nutrient profiles (NP) to restrict the use of NHC on foods that are high in salt, fat or sugar. This qualitative study aims to research knowledge on adults’ attitudes, perceptions and behaviour towards NHC on dairy products.

The study used a thematic analysis using transcripts from a series of discussion groups, attended by adults (n = 24). The participants also completed an introductory questionnaire.

The study noted positive attitudes towards dairy protein. This attitude was common across age, gender or life stage. There were misperceptions regarding yoghurt composition and health benefits. There were negative perceptions of low-fat nutrition claims on yoghurt, which led to a preference for full-fat dairy products. This requires further insight and research.

Participants from a wider socio-demographic group could have broadened the research limits of this project.

These findings will interest policymakers, regulators, dieticians and the food industry.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether reported nutritional knowledge and the acceptance of benefit claims for a fresh produce item is related to changes in preference in order to provide food marketers insight and guidance into giving consumers more information to change beliefs and preferences, using health‐benefit claims to position their brands as offering ingredients, e.g. Lycopene which may prevent serious illnesses such as heart disease and cancer.

The sample was drawn from an internet panel maintained by Markettools, Inc, a respected market research company in the USA. A total of 594 respondents were surveyed. Besides demographic questions, respondents were asked about their knowledge of nine nutrients. Basic nutrient knowledge was estimated through a one‐sample t‐test tested against a value of two on a 1‐4 scale. Respondents evaluated eight benefit statements regarding the health benefits of mushrooms. After reading each statement, respondents indicated their likelihood of purchasing fresh mushrooms and were asked about the believability, favorability, and uniqueness of each statement.

The results indicate that health‐related food benefit claims are better accepted by female respondents who claim to be nutritionally knowledgeable and who are older. Three hypotheses related to nutritional knowledge and beliefs showed that knowledge and beliefs have an effect but the effect varied by nutrient and nutrient cluster. In particular, knowledge of esoteric nutrients such as Pantothenic Acid was associated with acceptance of health‐related claims.

Food marketers are spending millions of dollars/pounds/euros on informing people of the nutrient content and health benefits of their foods. However, this money can be better spent if one first understands the existing levels of nutritional knowledge and the specific nutrients that motivate change in preference or buying intention.

This paper builds on the existing body of knowledge using additional statistical techniques to cluster nutrients and to provide a demonstration on a fresh produce food group not currently investigated in the literature. It suggests that food marketers need to gather more information on their consumers to target their health and nutrition message to the proper (more receptive) audience.