Consumers' purchase decisions for products with nutrition and health claims: What role do product category and gaze duration on claims play?

Labeling food packages with nutrition and health claims is a widely used practice. This study aims to contribute to the literature by examining the gaze and purchase behavior of consumers regarding food products with nutrition and health claims. A close-to-realistic purchase situation with three-dimensional food packages with nutrition, health, and taste claims was simulated while the participants' eye movements were measured using head-mounted eye tracking glasses. In the purchase situation, two food categories with differing perceived healthiness were offered, orange juice and milk chocolate. In total, 156 consumers participated in this study which was undertaken in Germany. The findings indicate that each claim was noticed by at least 85% of the participants and health claims were looked at longer than nutrition or taste claims. Furthermore, when compared to other participants, the longer a participant looked at a specific claim, the more likely the participant was to purchase the respective product. Even though the product category had no effect on the gaze duration on claims, it affected the purchase behavior. Nutrition claims were preferred for orange juice while taste claims were preferred for milk chocolate. Health claims were preferred for neither. Marketers can benefit from this study, as it shows the gaze duration on claims influenced the purchase likelihood. Another important finding is that there are great differences between product categories regarding the type of claim consumers prefer.

Steinhauser J ，Janssen M ，Hamm U 《-》

Who Buys Products with Nutrition and Health Claims? A Purchase Simulation with Eye Tracking on the Influence of Consumers' Nutrition Knowledge and Health Motivation.

Steinhauser J ，Janssen M ，Hamm U 《Nutrients》

Influence of front-of-pack labelling and regulated nutrition claims on consumers' perceptions of product healthfulness and purchase intentions: A randomized controlled trial.

Mandatory front-of-pack (FOP) labelling was proposed in Canada to highlight foods with high contents of sugars, sodium and/or saturated fats, which would be displayed on labels along with the mandatory Nutrition Facts table and voluntary nutrition claims. In an online survey, participants (n = 1997) were randomized to one of four FOP labelling conditions: 1) control, 2) warning label, 3) health star rating or 4) traffic light labelling. Participants were shown four drinks (a healthier drink with or without a disease risk reduction claim, a healthier drink with or without a nutrient content claim, a less healthy drink with or without a disease risk reduction claim and a less healthy drink with or without a nutrient content claim) in random order and one at a time. Participants rated perceived product healthfulness and purchase intentions using a 7-point Likert scale. Participants could access the Nutrition Facts table while viewing labels. Results showed less healthy drinks displaying any FOP labelling were perceived as less healthy compared to the control. In healthier drinks, health star rating and traffic light labelling created a 'halo' effect, which was not observed with warning labels. Similar results were observed with purchase intentions. Drinks displaying a disease risk reduction claim were perceived as healthier than those without (p < 0.001) regardless of product's healthfulness. The effect of a nutrient content claim was not significantly different. The effect of FOP labelling and claims was mitigated for those who used the Nutrition Facts table. FOP labelling was likely helpful for consumers with different levels of health literacy. Overall, FOP labelling had significantly stronger influence than nutrition claims on consumers' perceptions; however, the effect of each FOP label varied on healthier and less healthy drinks.

Franco-Arellano B ，Vanderlee L ，Ahmed M ，Oh A ，L'Abbé M ... -  《-》

The role of nutrition labels and advertising claims in altering consumers' evaluation and choice.

Despite policy efforts, consumers' well-informed healthful choice is a challenge. Due to increasing number of benefit claims advertising taste or health front of pack (FOP), consumers face the dilemma to trade taste for health. To understand the mechanisms underlying food evaluation, this study investigates the health-pleasure trade-off and its effect on consumers' choice. 240 EU consumers took part in a taste experiment, after being presented with the product FOP. Half of the products carried a nutrition label FOP, respectively, reduced fat for potato chips, reduced sugar for cereal bars. Further, one third of the products carried health benefit claim, one third taste benefit claim, and one third no additional claim FOP. Attention to information and its effect on experienced taste, health perception and the buying intention were measured. The results show that the message displayed FOP altered consumers evaluation and choice. The effectiveness of the FOP message further depended on consumers' health motivation and the healthfulness perception of carrier products. The outcomes are summarized in a framework of health-pleasure trade-off. Current findings call for the establishment of standards to avoid the use of misleading information FOP.

Bialkova S ，Sasse L ，Fenko A 《-》

The effect of location and type of nutrition content claims (NCCs) on healthy food purchase intentions: findings from an experimental study.

Li S ，Liu P ，Guo Y 《BMC PUBLIC HEALTH》