Product Label List Format: Effects of Item Arrangement and Completeness on Comparison Time and Accuracy

Abstract

This research examined the influence of two factors on the ease of gaining information from item lists: the order and completeness of the items displayed. Food nutrition labels served as the vehicle to test the manipulated lists on comparison time and accuracy performance measures. Four booklets, each containing 12 pairs of nutrient labels, were constructed in which the listed items were: (1) either arranged in a standard order or in a random order, and (2) either had a complete set of nutrients (including nutrients not present in the product) or a partial set of nutrients (excluding nutrients with zero or near-zero amounts in the product). Thirty-two participants were instructed to assume that their physician has told them to increase their intake of three specific nutrients and decrease their intake of three other nutrients. One label of each pair contained a higher level of one nutrient that should be increased or a lower level of one nutrient that should be decreased. Participants were to determine which of the two labels would be better given the prescribed diet. Time and accuracy measures were collected. Participants made significantly faster judgments for nutrients arranged in a standard order than for nutrients arranged in a random order. For all conditions, the error rate was low. An interaction indicated that labels with a complete set of nutrients in a standard order produced fewer errors than (a) labels in a standard order with some nutrients missing or (b) labels with a complete set of nutrients in a random order. Implications of making lists compatible with expectations are described.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barlow

Wogalter

M.S.

(1991). Increasing the surface area on small product containers to facilitate communication of label information and warnings. In Proceedings of Interface 1991. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.

Francik

E. P.

Kane

R. M.

(1987). Optimizing visual search and cursor movement in pull-down menus. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 31st Annual Meeting (pp. 722–726). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.

Heimbach

J.T.

(1982). Public understanding of food label information. Washington DC: U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Heimbach

J.T.

Stokes

R.C.

(1982). Nutrition labeling and public health: Survey of American Institute of Nutrition members, food industry, and consumers. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 30, 700–708.

Levy

A.S.

Fein

S. B.

Schucker

R.E.

(1992). More effective nutrition label formats are not necessarily preferred. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 92, 1230–1234.

Levy

A.S.

Mathews

Stephenson

Tenney

J.E.

Schucker

R.E.

(1985). The impact of a nutrition information program on food purchases. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 4, 1–13.

Mayhew

D. J.

(1992). Principles and guidelines in software user interface design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Opinion Research Corporation. (1990). Food labeling and nutrition: What Americans want-Summary of findings. Washington DC: National Food Processors Association.

Somberg

B. L.

(1987). A comparison of rule-based and positionally constant arrangement of computer menu items. In CHI 1987 Proceedings (pp. 150–153), ACM.

10.

Sullivan

L.W.

(1990, July 12). Press Conference on Food Labeling. Washington, DC: Hubert H. Humphrey Building.

11.

Tullis

T. S.

(1990). The formatting of alphanumeric displays: A review and analysis. In Venturino

(Ed.) Selected Readings in Human Factors (pp. 371–396). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.

12.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1989). Food labeling: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking. Federal Register (DHHS Pub. 21 CER Ch. 1). Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

13.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1991). Food Labeling; General Provisions; Nutrition Labeling; Nutrient Content Claims; Health Claims; Ingredient Labeling; State and Local Requirements; and Exemptions; Proposed Rules. Federal Register (DHHS Publication 21 CFR Part 101, et al.) Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

14.

Wogalter

M. S.

Young

S. L.

(1994). The effect of alternative product-label design on warning compliance. Applied Ergonomics, 25, 53–57.