Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Colour Me In – an empirical study on consumer responses to the traffic light signposting system in nutrition labelling

  • Sophie Hieke (a1) and Petra Wilczynski (a1)

Abstract

Objective

As a means of empowering consumers, nutrition labelling has become a widely discussed topic. Simplicity and uniformity of labelling systems are regarded as the prevailing demands from the consumer side. In the present study, we analyse the effects of the traffic light signposting scheme on consumers’ food choices.

Design

In an online survey, respondents first rated the understandability of the traffic light signposting scheme. In a following conjoint experiment, they indicated which products they would select as the healthiest of the presented products, based on the nutritive information provided by the traffic light signposting scheme.

Setting

A major German university.

Subjects

In total 2002 undergraduate students participated in the survey. Two-thirds (69 %) of the respondents were female and the majority of the respondents (70 %) were between 18 and 24 years old. Seventy-seven per cent of the participants indicated that they had a higher level of education.

Results

Overall, the participants rated the understandability of the traffic light nutrition signposting scheme fairly high (5·9 out of 7). Sugar and fat were found to be the most important attributes of the scheme. Participants placed greater emphases on a change in a product's nutrient characteristic from ‘amber to ‘red’ compared with a change from ‘green’ to ‘amber’.

Conclusions

Our results confirm the signalling effect of colour coding as it helps reduce the complexity of decision making. Our findings shed new light on the ongoing discussion concerning appropriate and efficient nutrition labelling and provide interesting insights for further research as well as implications for public policy making.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Colour Me In – an empirical study on consumer responses to the traffic light signposting system in nutrition labelling
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Colour Me In – an empirical study on consumer responses to the traffic light signposting system in nutrition labelling
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Colour Me In – an empirical study on consumer responses to the traffic light signposting system in nutrition labelling
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

*Corresponding author: Email sophie.hieke@eufic.org

References

Hide All
1. Cheftel, JC (2005) Food and nutrition labelling in the European Union. Food Chem 93, 531550.
2. Przyrembel, H (2004) Food labelling legislation in the EU and consumers information. Trends Food Sci Technol 15, 360365.
3. Caraher, M & Coveney, J (2004) Public health nutrition and food policy. Public Health Nutr 7, 591598.
4. Borgmeier, I & Westenhoefer, J (2009) Impact of different label formats on healthiness evaluation and food choice of consumers: a randomized-controlled study. BMC Public Health 9, 184.
5. Grunert, KG & Wills, JM (2007) A review of European research on consumer response to nutrition information on food labels. J Public Health 15, 385399.
6. Cowburn, G & Stockley, L (2003) A Systematic Review of the Research on Consumer Understanding of Nutrition Labelling. Brussels: European Heart Network.
7. Cowburn, G & Stockley, L (2005) Consumer understanding and use of nutrition labelling: a systematic review. Public Health Nutr 8, 2128.
8. Baltas, G (2001) Nutrition labelling: issues and policies. Eur J Mark 35, 708721.
9. Lawrence, M (2009) Do food regulatory systems protect public health? Public Health Nutr 12, 22472249.
10. Drichoutis, AC, Lazaridis, P & Nayga, RM Jr (2005) Nutrition knowledge and consumer use of nutritional food labels. Eur Rev Agric Econ 32, 93118.
11. Lobstein, T & Davies, S (2008) Defining and labelling ‘healthy’ and ‘unhealthy’ food. Public Health Nutr 12, 331340.
12. Commission of the European Communities (2007) White Paper on A Strategy for Europe on Nutrition, Overweight and Obesity related health issues. http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_determinants/life_style/nutrition/documents/nutrition_wp_en.pdf (accessed April 2011).
13. Nishida, C, Uauy, R, Kumanyika, S et al. (2004) The joint WHO/FAO consultation on diet, nutrition, and the prevention of chronic diseases. Public Health Nutr 7, 245250.
14. Swinburn, BA, Caterson, I, Seidell, JC et al. (2004) Diet, nutrition and the prevention of excess weight gain and obesity. Public Health Nutr 7, 123146.
15. Trübswasser, U & Branca, F (2009) Nutrition policy is taking shape in Europe. Public Health Nutr 12, 295306.
16. Stockley, L, Kaur, A & Rayner, M (2008) Summary of Original Research from December 2006–June 2008 on Consumer Preferences and Use of Front of Pack Nutrition Schemes. Brussels: European Heart Network.
17. Feunekes, GIJ, Gortemaker, IA, Willems, AA et al. (2008) Front-of-pack nutrition labelling: testing effectiveness of different nutrition labelling formats front-of-pack in four European countries. Appetite 50, 5770.
18. Grunert, KG, Wills, JM & Fernández-Celemím, L (2010) Nutrition knowledge, and use and understanding of nutrition information on food labels among consumers in the UK. Appetite 55, 177189.
19. Jones, G & Richardson, M (2007) An objective examination of consumer perception of nutrition information based on healthiness ratings and eye movements. Public Health Nutr 10, 238244.
20. Kelly, B, Hughes, C, Chapman, K et al. (2009) Consumer testing of the acceptability and effectiveness of front-of-pack food labelling systems for the Australian grocery market. Health Promot Int 24, 120129.
21. European Commission (2006) Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on nutrition and health claims made on food. Official Journal of the European Union L404, 935.
22. Harper, L, Souta, P, Ince, J et al. (2007) What Consumers Want: A Literature Review. London: Food Standards Agency.
23. van Kleef, E, van Trijp, H, Paeps, F et al. (2007) Consumer preferences for front-of-pack calories labelling. Public Health Nutr 11, 203213.
24. Gorton, D, Ni Mhurchu, C, Chen, M et al. (2008) Nutrition labels: a survey of use, understanding and preferences among ethnically diverse shoppers in New Zealand. Public Health Nutr 12, 13591365.
25. German Nutrition Society (2008) Stellungnahme der DGE zur Erweiterten Nährwertinformation auf der Basis des ,,1 plus 4“-Modells. http://www.dge.de/pdf/ws/DGE-Stellungnahme-LM-Kennzeichnung-2008-09-09.pdf (accessed April 2011).
26. European Food Information Council (2008) European consumers spill the beans on food labels. http://www.eufic.org/page/de/fftid/european-consumers-spill-the-beans-on-food-labels/ (accessed April 2011).
27. Gallani, B (2005) A Simplified Labelling Scheme. Brussels: The European Consumers’ Organisation.
28. OPTEM SARL (2005) The European Consumers’ Attitudes Regarding Product Labelling. Qualitative Study in 28 European Countries. Brussels: European Commission.
29. TNS (2007) GDA Omnibus Survey. http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/fopls0701.pdf (accessed April 2011).
30. EdComs (2007) Review and Analysis of Current Literature on Consumer Understanding of Nutrition and Health Claims Made on Food. London: Food Standards Agency.
31. Malam, S, Clegg, S, Kirwan, S et al. (2009) Comprehension and Use of UK Nutrition Signpost and Labelling Schemes. London: Food Standards Agency.
32. Loureiro, ML, Gracia, A & Nayga, RM Jr (2006) Do consumers value nutrition labels? Eur Rev Agric Econ 33, 249268.
33. Vyth, EL, Steenhuis, IHM, Vlot, JA et al. (2010) Actual use of a front-of-pack nutrition logo in the supermarket: consumers’ motives in food choice. Public Health Nutr 13, 18821990.
34. Sacks, G, Rayner, M & Swinburn, B (2009) Impact of front-of-pack ‘traffic light’ nutrition labelling on consumer food purchases in the UK. Health Promot Int 24, 344352.
35. Balcombe, K, Fraser, I & Di Falco, S (2010) Traffic lights and food choice: a choice experiment examining the relationship between nutritional food labels and price. Food Policy 35, 211220.
36. Grossman, RP & Wisenblit, JZ (1999) What we know about consumers’ colour choices. J Mark Pract Appl Mark Sci 5, 7888.
37. Taft, C (1997) Colour meaning and context: comparisons of semantic ratings of colours on samples and objects. Color Res Appl 22, 4050.
38. Crowley, AE (1993) The two-dimensional impact of colour on shopping. Mark Lett 4, 5969.
39. Holmes, CB & Buchanan, JA (1984) Colour preference as a function of the object described. Bull Psychon Soc 22, 423425.
40. Bellizzi, JA, Crowley, AE & Hasty, RW (1983) The effects of colour in store design. J Retailing 59, 2145.
41. Madden, TJ, Hewett, K & Roth, MS (2000) Managing images in different cultures: a cross-national study on colour meanings and preference. J Int Mark 8, 90107.
42. Chakraborty, G, Ball, D, Gaeth, GJ et al. (2002) The ability of ratings and choice conjoint to predict market shares: a Monte Carlo simulation. J Bus Res 55, 237249.
43. Louviere, JJ (1997) Conjoint analysis. In Advanced Methods of Marketing Research, pp. 223259 [RP Bagozzi, editor]. Chichester: John Wiley.
44. Moore, WL (2004) A cross-validity comparison of rating-based and choice-based conjoint analysis models. J Res Mark 21, 299312.
45. Green, PE & Srinivasan, V (1990) Conjoint analysis in marketing: new developments with implications for research and practice. J Mark 54, 319.
46. Orme, BK (2006) Getting Started with Conjoint Analysis – Strategies for Product Design and Pricing Research. Madison, WI: Research Publishers LLC.
47. Food Standards Agency (2007) Front of Pack Traffic Light Signpost Labelling – Technical Guidance, issue 2. London: Food Standards Agency.
48. Foodwatch (2009) 77 Prozent der Bürger sagen Nein zum Ampel-Verbot. http://www.foodwatch.de/foodwatch/content/e10/e13946/e24373/e28985/Emnid-Umfrage_Ampel_200907__ger.pdf (accessed April 2011).
49. Fuchs, S (2009) Nutzenmessung mit Hilfe der Conjoint-Analyse. In Theorien und Methoden der Betriebswirtschaft, pp. 637651 [M Schwaiger and A Meyer, editors]. München: Vahlen.
50. Vermeulen, B, Goos, P & Vandebroek, M (2008) Models and optimal designs for conjoint choice experiments including a no-choice option. Int J Res Mark 25, 94103.
51. Haaijer, R, Kamakura, W & Wedel, M (2001) The ‘no-choice’ alternative in conjoint choice experiments. Int J Res Mark 43, 93106.
52. Lenk, P, De Sarbo, W, Green, P et al. (1996) Hierarchical Bayes conjoint analysis: recovery of part worth heterogeneity from reduced experimental designs. Mark Sci 15, 173191.
53. Sarstedt, M (2008) A review of recent approaches for capturing heterogeneity in partial least squares path modelling. J Model Manage 3, 140161.
54. Voeth, M & Hahn, C (1998) Limit conjoint-analyse. Marketing ZFP 20, 119132.
55. Grunert, KG, Fernández-Celemín, L, Wills, JM et al. (2010) Use and understanding of nutrition information on food labels in six European countries. J Public Health 18, 261277.
56. Johnson, RM & Orme, BK (1996) How Many Questions Should You Ask in Choice-Based Conjoint Studies? Sawtooth Software Research Paper Series. Sequim, WA: Sawtooth Software Inc.
57. British Retail Consortium (2009) British Retailing: A commitment to health. http://www.brc.org.uk/downloads/british_retailing_a_commitment_to_health.pdf (accessed April 2011).

Keywords

Colour Me In – an empirical study on consumer responses to the traffic light signposting system in nutrition labelling

  • Sophie Hieke (a1) and Petra Wilczynski (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.