Interpretive front-of-pack nutrition labels. Comparing competing recommendations

• Published in: Appetite 2014-11, Vol.82, p.67-77
• Main Authors: Maubach, Ninya, Hoek, Janet, Mather, Damien
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Best–worst scaling; Choice Behavior; Consumer Behavior; Female; Food Labeling - methods; Food Preferences; Front-of-pack nutrition label; Health Behavior; Health claims; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; New Zealand; Nutrition Policy; Young Adult
• ISSN: 0195-6663; 1095-8304
• DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2014.07.006

•We conducted a best–worst experiment to assess how nutrition labels affect choices.•We also tested the labels' effects in the presence of nutrition and health claims.•Respondents showed the most differentiation with Multiple Traffic Light labels.•Respondents made similar choices with a Stars label, but not when rating healthiness.•Health claims made less nutritious options more preferable. Many stakeholders support introducing an interpretive front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition label, but disagree over the form it should take. In late 2012, an expert working group established by the New Zealand government recommended the adoption of an untested summary rating system: a Star label. This study used a best–worst scaling choice experiment to estimate how labels featuring the new Star rating, the Multiple Traffic Light (MTL), Daily Intake Guide (DIG), and a no-FOP control affected consumers' choice behaviours and product perceptions. Nutrient-content and health claims were included in the design. We also assessed whether respondents who used more or less information during the choice tasks differed in their selection patterns. Overall, while respondents made broadly similar choices with respect to the MTL and Star labels, the MTL format had a significantly greater impact on depressing preference as a food's nutritional profile became less healthy. Health claims increased rankings of less nutritious options, though this effect was less pronounced when the products featured an MTL. Further, respondents were best able to differentiate products' healthiness with MTL labels. The proposed summary Stars system had less effect on choice patterns than an MTL label and our findings highlight the need for policy makers to ensure that decisions to introduce FOP labels are underpinned by robust research evidence. These results suggest that the proposed summary Stars system will have less effect on shifting food choice patterns than interpretive FOP nutrition label featuring traffic light ratings.