It has been a decade since the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act mandated that the Nutrition Facts panel on food labels be formatted with nutrient reference values, namely, percent daily value (%DV). Across a series of three studies, the authors demonstrate that consumers have difficulty using %DV from the Nutrition Facts panel to determine their required calcium intake. These effects are demonstrated in Study 1 with consumers who are at risk for osteoporosis (seniors age 55 and over). In Study 2, the authors provide evidence that physicians dispense calcium recommendations to their patients in milligrams, even though most doctors cannot transform the %DV from the Nutrition Facts panel into milligrams. Study 3 reveals that exposing pregnant and lactating women to easy-to-use information in combination with the Nutrition Facts panel increases their calcium consumption to within the suggested daily recommended range.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BalasubramanianSiva K., and ColeCatherine (2002), “Consumers’ Search and Use of Nutrition Information: The Challenge and Promise of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act,”Journal of Marketing, 66 (July), 112–27.
2.
BaroneMichael J., RandallL. Rose, KennethC. Manning, and PaulW. Miniard (1996), “Another Look at the Impact of Reference Information on Consumer Impressions of Nutrition Information,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 15 (Spring), 55–62.
3.
BurtonScot, JudithA. Garretson, and AnneM. Velliquette (1999), “Implications of Accurate Usage of Nutrition Facts Panel Information for Food Product Evaluations and Purchase Intentions,”Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27 (4), 470–80.
4.
DerbyBrenda S., and AlanS. Levy (2001), “Do Food Labels Work? Gauging the Effectiveness of Food Labels Pre- and Post-NLEA,” in Handbook of Marketing and Society, PaulN. Bloom, and GregT. Gundlach, eds. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 372–98.
5.
FabrigarLeander, and PettyRichard (1999), “The Role of the Affective and Cognitive Bases of Attitudes in Susceptibility to Affectively and Cognitively Based Persuasion,”Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25 (March), 363–81.
6.
FDA, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (2003), “Guidance on How to Understand and Use the Nutrition Facts Panel on Food Labels,” (July), [available at http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/∼dms/foodlab.html].
7.
GarretsonJudith A., 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.
IvrySara (2003), “When It Comes to Calcium, the Advice Is to Keep Eating,”The New York Times, (June 22), WH7.
12.
JoharGita, MaheshwaranDurairaj, and PeracchioLaura (2006), “MAPping the Frontiers: Theoretical Advances in Consumer Research on Memory, Affect, and Persuasion,”Journal of Consumer Research, 33 (1), 139–49.
13.
KellerScott B., LandryMike, OlsonJeanne, AnneM. Velliquette, 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.
14.
LevyAlan S., and SaraB. Fein (1998), “Consumers’ Ability to Perform Tasks Using Nutrition Labels,”Journal of Nutrition Education, 30 (July-August), 210–17.
15.
LevyAlan S., SaraB. Fein, and RaymondE. Schucker (1996), “Performance Characteristics of Seven Nutrition Label Formats,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 15 (Spring), 1–15.
16.
LordCharles G., and LepperMark (1999), “Attitude Representation Theory,” in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, ZannaMark, ed. San Diego: Academic Press, 265–343.
17.
MoormanChristine (1996), “A Quasi Experiment to Assess the Consumer and Informational Determinants of Nutrition Information Processing Activities: The Case of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 15 (Spring), 28–44.
18.
PorterD.V., and EarlR.O. (1990), Nutrition Labeling: Issues and Directions for the 1990s.Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
19.
SzykmanLisa R., PaulN. Bloom, and AlanS. Levy (1997), “A Proposed Model of the Use of Package Claims and Nutrition Labels,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 16 (Fall), 228–41.
20.
TussingLisa, and Chapman-NovakofskiKaren (2004), “Doing the Math for Calcium? See It, Do It, Teach IT!”Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 36, 99–100.
21.
ViswanathanMadhubalan, and HastakManoj (2002), “The Role of Summary Information in Facilitating Consumers’ Comprehension of Nutrition Information,”Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 21 (Fall), 305–318.
