In March 2012, retailers were required to disclose nutrition information on packaging for all ground and chopped products (e.g., ground beef, turkey) and hamburger. Drawing from this legislation, the authors develop and test hypotheses based on internal reference points and assimilation of external values. The results of three studies (a cross-sectional survey and two between-subjects experiments) indicate that the inclusion of a Nutrition Facts panel (NFP) on ground beef packaging moderates the effects of the lean-to-fat ratio on consumers' product evaluations. Because consumers' internal reference points are higher than the relatively low level of calories, fat, and saturated fat found in lean ground beef, nutrition information disclosure improves attribute evaluations. In addition, for the fattier options, provision of the NFP increases diet-related disease risk perceptions and decreases both perceived healthfulness and purchase intentions. The results also show that inclusion of the NFP has a favorable effect on the choice of leaner ground beef options and diminishes the choice of options with higher calories and fat levels. The authors offer potential implications of the findings for policy and consumer welfare.
CraigAndrews J. (2011), “Warnings and Disclosures,” in Evidence-Based Communication of Risk and Benefits: A Users Guide, FischoffBaruch, BrewerNoel, and DownsJulie, eds. Rockville, MD: U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 149–61.
2.
CraigAndrews J., BurtonScot, and KeesJeremy (2011), “Is Simpler Always Better? Consumer Evaluations of Front-of-Package Nutrition Icons,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 30(Fall), 175–90.
3.
CraigAndrews J., NetemeyerRichard G., and BurtonScot (1998), “Consumer Generalization of Nutrient Content Claims in Advertising,”Journal of Marketing, 62(October), 62–75.
4.
BaumeisterRoy F., BratslavskyEllen, FinkenauerCatrin, and VohsKathleen D. (2001), “Bad Is Stronger Than Good,”Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323–70.
BlockLauren, and PeracchioLaura (2006), “The Calcium Quandary: How Consumers Use Nutrition Labels for Daily Diet,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 28(Fall), 188–96.
8.
BurtonScot, Craig AndrewsJ., and NetemeyerRichard G. (2000), “Nutrition Ad Claims and Disclosures: Interaction and Mediation Effects for Consumer Evaluations of the Ad and the Brand,”Marketing Letters, 11(August), 235–48.
9.
BurtonScot, BiswasAbhijit, and NetemeyerRichard (1994), “Effects of Alternative Nutrition Label Formats and Nutrition Reference Information on Consumer Perceptions, Comprehension, and Product Evaluation,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 13(Spring), 36–47.
10.
BurtonScot, GarretsonJudith A., and VelliquetteAnne M. (1999), “Implications of Accurate Usage of Nutrition Facts Panel and Information for Food Product Evaluations and Purchase Intentions,”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(4), 470–80.
11.
BurtonScot, HowlettElizabeth, and TangariAndrea (2009), “Food for Thought: How Will the Nutrition Labeling of Quick Service Restaurant Menu Items Influence Consumers' Product Evaluations, Purchase Intentions, and Choices?”Journal of Retailing, 85(3), 258–73.
12.
CacioppoJohn T., and PettyRichard E. (1984), “Source Factors and the Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 11, KinnearThomas, C., ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 668–72.
13.
Center for Science in the Public Interest (2010), “New Nutrition Labeling Rules for Meat a Missed Opportunity, Says CSPI,” (accessed May 25, 2011), [available at http://www.cspinet.org/new/201012291.html].
CohenJoel, B. (2005), “Seeing If,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 24(Fall), 181–82.
16.
CookLaurel A., BurtonScot, and HowlettElizabeth (2011), “Health Risk Factors and Their Effect on Consumers' Use of Nutrition Facts Panels,”Journal of Consumer Affairs, 45(Fall), 516–27.
17.
Federal Register (2010), “Nutrition Labeling of Single-Ingredient Products and Ground or Chopped Meat and Poultry Products: Final Rule,”75(249), 82148–167.
18.
FiskeSusan, T. (1982), “Schema-Triggered Affect: Applications to Social Perception,” in Affect and Cognition: The Seventeenth Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, ClarkMargaret S., and FiskeSusan T., eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 55–78.
19.
GarretsonJudith, and BurtonScot (2000), “Effects of Nutrition Facts Panel Values, Nutrition Claims, and Health Claims on Consumer Attitudes, Perceptions of Disease-Related Risks, and Trust,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19(Fall), 213–27.
HowlettElizabeth, BurtonScot, and KozupJohn (2008), “How Modification of the Nutrition Facts Panel Influences Consumers at Risk for Heart Disease: The Case of Trans Fat,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 27(Spring), 83–97.
22.
HowlettElizabeth, BurtonScot, TangariAndrea Heintz, and Bui-NguyenMyla (2012), “Hold the Salt! Effects of Sodium Information Provision, Sodium Content, and Hypertension on Perceived Cardiovascular Disease Risk and Purchase Intentions,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 31(Spring), 4–18.
Institute of Medicine (2010), Examination of Front-of-Package Nutrition Rating Systems and Symbols: Phase 1 Report.Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
25.
KellerScott B., LandryMike, OlsonJeanne, VelliquetteAnne M., BurtonScot, and Craig AndrewsJ. (1997), “The Effects of Nutrition Package Claims, Nutrition Facts Panels, and Motivation to Process Nutrition Information on Consumer Product Evaluations,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 16(Fall), 256–69.
26.
KempElyria, BurtonScot, CreyerElizabeth, and SuterTracy (2007), “When Do Nutrient Content and Nutrient Content Claims Matter? Assessing Consumer Tradeoffs Between Carbohydrates and Fat,”Journal of Consumer Affairs, 41(Summer), 47–73.
27.
KozupJohn, CreyerElizabeth H., and BurtonScot (2003), “Making Healthful Food Choices: The Influence of Health Claims and Nutrition Information on Consumers' Evaluations of Packaged Food Products and Restaurant Menu Items,”Journal of Marketing, 67(April), 19–34.
28.
LevinIrwin, P. (1987), “Associative Effects of Information Framing,”Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 25(2), 85–86.
29.
LevinIrwin P., and GaethGary J. (1988), “How Consumers Are Affected by the Framing of Attribute Information Before and After Consuming the Product,”Journal of Consumer Research, 15(12), 374–78.
30.
LevinIrwin P., JohnsonRichard D., RussoCraig P., and DeldinPatricia J. (1985), “Framing Effects in Judgment Tasks with Varying Amounts of Information,”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36(3), 362–77.
31.
MickDavid (2006), “Meaning and Mattering Through Transformative Consumer Research,” in Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 33, PechmannCornelia, and PriceLinda L., eds. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research, 1–4.
32.
MitraAnu, HastakManoj, FordGary T., and RingoldDebra Jones (1999), “Can the Educationally Disadvantaged Interpret the FDA-Mandated Nutrition Facts Panel in the Presence of an Implied Health Claim?”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 18(Spring), 106–117.
33.
MorwitzVicki (1997), “Why Consumers Don't Always Accurately Predict Their Own Future Behavior,”Marketing Letters, 8(1), 57–70.
NewmanMargaret, A. (2000), Health as Expanding Consciousness.Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
36.
NLEA (1990), Pub. L. 101-535, 104 Stat. 2355.
37.
PettyRichard E., and CacioppoJohn T. (1979), “Issue Involvement Can Increase or Decrease Persuasion by Enhancing Message-Relevant Cognitive Responses,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(10), 1915–26.
38.
PettyRichard E., and CacioppoJohn T. (1986), “The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion,” in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, BerkowitzL., ed. New York: Academic Press, 123–205.
RozinPaul, and RoyzmanEdward B. (2001), “Negativity Bias, Negativity Dominance, and Contagion,”Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(4), 296–320.
41.
SinhaRashmi, CrossAmanda J., GraubardBarry I., LeitzmannMichael F., and SchatzkinArthur (2009), “Meat Intake and Mortality: A Prospective Study of over Half a Million People,”Archives of Internal Medicine, 169(March), 562–71.
42.
StewartDavid W., and MartinIngrid M. (1994), “Intended and Unintended Consequences of Warning Labels: A Review and Synthesis of Empirical Research,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 13(Spring), 1–19.
43.
SujanMita (1985), “Consumer Knowledge: Effects on Evaluation Strategies Mediating Consumer Judgments,”Journal of Consumer Research, 12(June), 31–46.
44.
TangariAndrea Heintz, BurtonScot, HowlettElizabeth, ChoYoon-Na, and ThyroffAnastasia (2010), “Weighing in on Fast Food Consumption: The Effects of Meal and Calorie Disclosures on Consumer Fast Food Evaluations,”Journal of Consumer Affairs, 44(Fall), 431–62.
45.
TverskyAmos, and KahnemanDaniel (1981), “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice,”Science, 211(January), 453–58.
46.
USDA (2011), “U.S. Beef and Cattle Industry: Background Statistics and Information,”USDA Economic Research Services, (accessed July 8, 2011), [available at http://www.ers.usda.gov/news/BSECoverage.htm].
47.
USDA, Agricultural Research Service (2010), “USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference,” Press Release 23, (accessed January 21, 2011), [available at http://www.ars.usda.gov/ba/bhnrc/ndl].
48.
ViswanathanMadhubalan, HastakManoj, and GauRoland (2009), “Understanding and Facilitating the Usage of Nutrition Labels by Low-Literate Consumers,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 28(Fall), 135–45.
