The Effect of Graphic Warnings on Sugary-Drink Purchasing

Governments have proposed text warning labels to decrease consumption of sugary drinks—a contributor to chronic diseases such as diabetes. However, they may be less effective than more evocative, graphic warning labels. We field-tested the effectiveness of graphic warning labels (vs. text warning labels, calorie labels, and no labels), provided insight into psychological mechanisms driving effectiveness, and assessed consumer sentiment. Study 1 indicated that graphic warning labels reduced the share of sugary drinks purchased in a cafeteria from 21.4% at baseline to 18.2%—an effect driven by substitution of water for sugary drinks. Study 2 showed that graphic warning labels heighten negative affect and prompt consideration of health consequences. Study 3 indicated that public support for graphic warning labels can be increased by conveying effectiveness information. These findings could spur more effective labeling policies that facilitate healthier choices, do not decrease overall beverage purchases, and are publicly accepted.

[1]  Eric M. VanEpps,et al.  A Systematic Review of Calorie Labeling and Modified Calorie Labeling Interventions: Impact on Consumer and Restaurant Behavior , 2017, Obesity.

[2]  B. Popkin,et al.  In Mexico, Evidence Of Sustained Consumer Response Two Years After Implementing A Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax. , 2017, Health affairs.

[3]  B. Popkin,et al.  Changes in prices, sales, consumer spending, and beverage consumption one year after a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages in Berkeley, California, US: A before-and-after study , 2017, PLoS medicine.

[4]  François A. Carrillat,et al.  The Effectiveness of Warning Labels for Consumers: A Meta-Analytic Investigation into Their Underlying Process and Contingencies , 2017 .

[5]  L. John,et al.  Psychologically Informed Implementations of Sugary-Drink Portion Limits , 2017, Psychology Science.

[6]  Eric M. VanEpps,et al.  The Influence of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Warnings: A Randomized Trial of Adolescents' Choices and Beliefs. , 2016, American journal of preventive medicine.

[7]  K. Ribisl,et al.  Effects of Strengthening Cigarette Pack Warnings on Attention and Message Processing: A Systematic Review , 2016, Journalism & mass communication quarterly.

[8]  K. Ribisl,et al.  The impact of strengthening cigarette pack warnings: Systematic review of longitudinal observational studies. , 2016, Social science & medicine.

[9]  C. Ni Mhurchu,et al.  Effects of plain packaging, warning labels, and taxes on young people’s predicted sugar-sweetened beverage preferences: an experimental study , 2016, International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.

[10]  C. Sunstein People Prefer System 2 Nudges (Kind Of) , 2016 .

[11]  C. Roberto,et al.  The Influence of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Health Warning Labels on Parents’ Choices , 2016, Pediatrics.

[12]  Ellen Peters,et al.  Graphic Warning Labels Elicit Affective and Thoughtful Responses from Smokers: Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial , 2015, PloS one.

[13]  D. Ogilvie,et al.  Portion, package or tableware size for changing selection and consumption of food, alcohol and tobacco , 2015, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[14]  Jessica K Pepper,et al.  Pictorial cigarette pack warnings: a meta-analysis of experimental studies , 2015, Tobacco Control.

[15]  S. Bleich,et al.  Reducing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption by providing caloric information: how Black adolescents alter their purchases and whether the effects persist. , 2014, American journal of public health.

[16]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable. , 2014, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[17]  C. Roberto,et al.  Potential benefits of calorie labeling in restaurants. , 2014, JAMA.

[18]  Edward Hill,et al.  Influence of point-of-sale tobacco displays and graphic health warning signs on adults: evidence from a virtual store experimental study. , 2014, American journal of public health.

[19]  E. Peters,et al.  Affective and cognitive mediators of the impact of cigarette warning labels. , 2014, Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.

[20]  Sarah M. Greene,et al.  Informed choice about breast cancer prevention: randomized controlled trial of an online decision aid intervention , 2013, Breast Cancer Research.

[21]  G. Loewenstein,et al.  Supplementing menu labeling with calorie recommendations to test for facilitation effects. , 2013, American journal of public health.

[22]  Shannon M Farley,et al.  Awareness and impact of New York City's graphic point-of-sale tobacco health warning signs , 2012, Tobacco Control.

[23]  S. Bleich,et al.  Reduction in purchases of sugar-sweetened beverages among low-income Black adolescents after exposure to caloric information. , 2012, American journal of public health.

[24]  Leif D. Nelson,et al.  False-Positive Psychology , 2011, Psychological science.

[25]  P. Ubel,et al.  Helping patients decide: ten steps to better risk communication. , 2011, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[26]  James F. Thrasher,et al.  Impact of graphic and text warnings on cigarette packs: findings from four countries over five years , 2009, Tobacco Control.

[27]  George Loewenstein,et al.  Strategies for Promoting Healthier Food Choices. , 2009, The American economic review.

[28]  J. Manson,et al.  Sweetened beverage consumption and risk of coronary heart disease in women. , 2009, The American journal of clinical nutrition.

[29]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Explaining Away: A Model of Affective Adaptation , 2008, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[30]  Paul Slovic,et al.  The impact and acceptability of Canadian-style cigarette warning labels among U.S. smokers and nonsmokers. , 2007, Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.

[31]  Ellen Peters,et al.  The Functions of Affect in Health Communications and in the Construction of Health Preferences , 2006 .

[32]  G. Loewenstein CHAPTER TWENTY-SIX. Out of Control: Visceral Influences on Behavior , 2004 .

[33]  Walter C Willett,et al.  Sugar-sweetened beverages, weight gain, and incidence of type 2 diabetes in young and middle-aged women. , 2004, JAMA.

[34]  P. Burstein The Impact of Public Opinion on Public Policy: A Review and an Agenda , 2003 .

[35]  G. Loewenstein,et al.  Time and Decision: Economic and Psychological Perspectives of Intertemporal Choice , 2003 .

[36]  B. Rolls,et al.  Portion size of food affects energy intake in normal-weight and overweight men and women. , 2002, The American journal of clinical nutrition.

[37]  Christopher K. Hsee,et al.  Risk as Feelings , 2001, Psychological bulletin.

[38]  Steven L Gortmaker,et al.  Relation between consumption of sugar-sweetened drinks and childhood obesity: a prospective, observational analysis , 2001, The Lancet.

[39]  W. Stroebe,et al.  Why most dieters fail but some succeed: a goal conflict model of eating behavior. , 2013, Psychological review.

[40]  E. Peters,et al.  THE FUNCTIONS OF AFFECT IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF PREFERENCES ( 2006 , 2008 .

[41]  E. Peters The Construction of Preference: The Functions of Affect in the Construction of Preferences , 2006 .

[42]  Melissa L. Finucane,et al.  Heuristics and Biases: The Affect Heuristic , 2002 .