The Effects of Nutrition Package Claims, Nutrition Facts Panels, and Motivation to Process Nutrition Information on Consumer Product Evaluations

In a laboratory experiment using a between-subjects design, the authors examine the effects on nutrition and product evaluations of nutrition claims made (e.g., “99% fat free; ” “low in calories ”) on a product package, product nutrition value levels, and enduring motivation to process nutrition information. Enduring motivation is shown to moderate the effects of product nutrition value on consumer evaluations. Also, nutrition claims interact with product nutrition value in affecting consumer perceptions of manufacturer credibility. Given the availability of nutrient levels in the Nutrition Facts panel on the back of the mock package, nutrition claims on the front of the package generally did not affect positively consumers’ overall product and purchase intention evaluations. The authors discuss some implications of these findings, suggestions for further research, and study limitations. 1 1. The generalizability of the findings from this laboratory study may be restricted because the mock package used as the stimulus was examined outside of an actual in-store purchase environment. Because consumers in store settings may spend less time and care examining Nutrition Facts panels and are subject to a variety of other influences (Cole and Balasubramanian 1992), findings from this study may not generalize to such settings.

[1]  Raymond E. Schucker,et al.  Performance Characteristics of Seven Nutrition Label Formats , 1996 .

[2]  John L. Swasy,et al.  Consumer Skepticism of Advertising Claims: Testing Hypotheses from Economics of Information , 1990 .

[3]  S. Fein,et al.  Nutrition knowledge levels about dietary fats and cholesterol: 1983-1988 , 1993 .

[4]  Jack M. Feldman,et al.  Self-generated validity and other effects of measurement on belief, attitude, intention, and behavior. , 1988 .

[5]  P. Ippolito,et al.  New Food Labeling Regulations and the Flow of Nutrition Information to Consumers , 1993 .

[6]  Terence A. Shimp,et al.  Effects of involvement, argument strength, and source characteristics on central and peripheral processing of advertising , 1990 .

[7]  C. Moorman The Effects of Stimulus and Consumer Characteristics on the Utilization of Nutrition Information , 1990 .

[8]  Catherine A. Cole,et al.  Age differences in consumers' search for information: Public policy implications. , 1993 .

[9]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[10]  J. Deighton,et al.  The Interaction of Advertising and Evidence , 1984 .

[11]  Chester A. Insko,et al.  Theories of attitude change , 1967 .

[12]  Alan D. Mathios,et al.  Health Claims in Food Marketing: Evidence on Knowledge and Behavior in the Cereal Market , 1991 .

[13]  Franziska Marquart,et al.  Communication and persuasion : central and peripheral routes to attitude change , 1988 .

[14]  Peter Wright,et al.  Persuasion Knowledge , 2022 .

[15]  P. Nelson Advertising as Information , 1974, Journal of Political Economy.

[16]  Paul J. Petruccelli Consumer and Marketing Implications of Information Provision: The Case of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990 , 1996 .

[17]  Scot Burton,et al.  Preliminary Assessment of Changes in Labels Required by the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990 , 1993 .

[18]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. , 1979 .

[19]  Manoj Hastak,et al.  Can Consumers Interpret Nutrition Information in the Presence of a Health Claim? A Laboratory Investigation , 1996 .

[20]  Ronald Paul Hill,et al.  The Nutrition Labeling and Education Act—Progress to Date and Challenges for the Future , 1996 .

[21]  R. E. Schucker,et al.  Nutrition labeling formats: performance and preference , 1991 .

[22]  J. K. Pappalardo,et al.  Evaluating the NLEA: Where's the Beef? , 1996 .

[23]  James C. Anderson,et al.  STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING IN PRACTICE: A REVIEW AND RECOMMENDED TWO-STEP APPROACH , 1988 .

[24]  Catherine A. Cole,et al.  Cognitive and Age-Related Differences in the Ability to Use Nutritional Information in a Complex Environment , 1990 .

[25]  John E. Calfee,et al.  Public Policy Issues in Health Claims for Foods , 1991 .

[26]  Nutrition labeling and public health: survey of American-Institute of Nutrition members, food industry, and consumers. , 1982, The American journal of clinical nutrition.

[27]  Christine Moorman,et al.  A Quasi Experiment to Assess the Consumer and Informational Determinants of Nutrition Information Processing Activities: The Case of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act , 1996 .

[28]  Scot Burton,et al.  Effects of Alternative Nutrition Label Formats and Nutrition Reference Information on Consumer Perceptions, Comprehension, and Product Evaluations , 1994 .