Which front-of-pack nutrition label is the most efficient one? The results of an eye-tracker study

被引:90
作者
Siegrist, Michael [1 ]
Leins-Hess, Rebecca [1 ]
Keller, Carmen [1 ]
机构
[1] Swiss Fed Inst Technol, IED, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland
关键词
Nutrition labels; GDA; Multiple traffic light; Eye-tracking; INFORMATION; ATTENTION; CONSUMERS; CHOICES; HEALTH; HEALTHFULNESS; PERCEPTIONS; DESIGN;
D O I
10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.07.010
中图分类号
TS2 [食品工业];
学科分类号
0832 ;
摘要
Different labeling systems that should help consumers make more balanced food decisions have been proposed and are currently in use. In the present study, the effectiveness of three different formats, the nutrition table format, the guideline daily amounts (GDAs) format, and the traffic light (TL) format, was examined. The eye-tracking method was combined with an experimental approach. The participants (N = 98) were randomly assigned to one of the three formats, and they were asked to evaluate the healthiness of five foods from different food categories. The eye-tracking data suggest that the participants needed more time to process the GDA format in comparison to the traffic light format and the nutrition table format. Moreover, the participants processed the traffic light format more efficiently than the nutrition table. In regard to information processing, the traffic light format was better than the other two formats. The participants were asked how they perceived the healthiness of the food products. The GDA, the TL and the nutrition table formats did not result in substantially different evaluations of the products. From an information processing perspective, the TL format has advantages over the other two formats. The TL format is a consumer-friendly way of communicating nutrition information. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:183 / 190
页数:8
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]   Influence of rational and intuitive thinking styles on food choice: Preliminary evidence from an eye-tracking study with yogurt labels [J].
Ares, Gaston ;
Mawad, Franco ;
Gimenez, Ana ;
Maiche, Alejandro .
FOOD QUALITY AND PREFERENCE, 2014, 31 :28-37
[2]   Effects of nutrition label format and product assortment on the healthfulness of food choice [J].
Aschemann-Witzel, Jessica ;
Grunert, Klaus G. ;
van Trijp, Hans C. M. ;
Bialkova, Svetlana ;
Raats, Monique M. ;
Hodgkins, Charo ;
Wasowicz-Kirylo, Grazyna ;
Koenigstorfer, Joerg .
APPETITE, 2013, 71 :63-74
[3]   An efficient methodology for assessing attention to and effect of nutrition information displayed front-of-pack [J].
Bialkova, Svetlana ;
van Trijp, Hans C. M. .
FOOD QUALITY AND PREFERENCE, 2011, 22 (06) :592-601
[4]   Impact of different food label formats on healthiness evaluation and food choice of consumers: a randomized-controlled study [J].
Borgmeier, Ingrid ;
Westenhoefer, Joachim .
BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, 2009, 9
[5]  
Cowburn G, 2005, PUBLIC HEALTH NUTR, V8, P21, DOI [10.1079/PHN2005666, 10.1079/PHN2004666]
[6]   Development and validation of a short, consumer-oriented nutrition knowledge questionnaire [J].
Dickson-Spillmann, Maria ;
Siegrist, Michael ;
Keller, Carmen .
APPETITE, 2011, 56 (03) :617-620
[7]  
Food Standards Agency, 2007, FRONT OF PACK TRAFF
[8]   Eye tracking and nutrition label use: A review of the literature and recommendations for label enhancement [J].
Graham, Dan J. ;
Orquin, Jacob L. ;
Visschers, Vivianne H. M. .
FOOD POLICY, 2012, 37 (04) :378-382
[9]   Predictors of nutrition label viewing during food purchase decision making: an eye tracking investigation [J].
Graham, Dan J. ;
Jeffery, Robert W. .
PUBLIC HEALTH NUTRITION, 2012, 15 (02) :189-197
[10]   Location, Location, Location: Eye-Tracking Evidence that Consumers Preferentially View Prominently Positioned Nutrition Information [J].
Graham, Dan J. ;
Jeffery, Robert W. .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DIETETIC ASSOCIATION, 2011, 111 (11) :1704-1711