Skip to main content Accessibility help

Confusion and nutritional backlash from news media exposure to contradictory information about carbohydrates and dietary fats

  • Danielle Clark (a1), Rebekah H Nagler (a2) and Jeff Niederdeppe (a1)



To test the effect of news media exposure to contradictory information about carbohydrates and dietary fats on levels of confusion, nutritional backlash and dietary intentions.


We conducted an online survey experiment between 11 and 28 February 2018, randomizing participants to one of six experimental conditions. Two ‘contradictory information’ conditions asked participants to read one news article on the risks of a low-carbohydrate diet and one article on the risks of a low-fat diet. Two ‘convergent information’ conditions asked participants to read two articles with similar information on the risks of one of these two diets. A fifth ‘established health recommendations’ control condition asked participants to read two articles on the harms of smoking and sun exposure. A sixth ‘no information’ condition served as a second control group. We used general linear models to test hypotheses on the effects of exposure on confusion, nutritional backlash and dietary intentions.




Adults (n 901) registered with Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (M-Turk).


Exposure to contradictory information about carbohydrates and dietary fats increased confusion and nutritional backlash compared with exposure to established health recommendations for non-dietary behaviours and a no-exposure control. Exposure to contradictory information also increased confusion compared with exposure to consistent nutrition information regarding carbohydrates and dietary fats.


Contradictory nutrition information in the news media can negatively affect consumers’ attitudes, beliefs and behavioural intentions. Dietary debates that play out in the media may adversely influence both short-term dietary decisions and future efforts to communicate about unrelated nutrition issues.


Corresponding author

*Corresponding author: Email


Hide All
1. Greiner, A, Smith, KC & Guallar, E (2010) Something fishy? News media presentation of complex health issues related to fish consumption guidelines. Public Health Nutr 13, 17861794.
2. Houn, F, Bober, MA, Huerta, EE et al. (1995) The association between alcohol and breast cancer: popular press coverage of research. Am J Public Health 85, 10821086.
3. Nagler, RH (2010) Steady Diet of Confusion: Contradictory Nutrition Messages in the Public Information Environment. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania.
4. Goldberg, JP & Sliwa, SA (2011) Communicating actionable nutrition messages: challenges and opportunities. Proc Nutr Soc 70, 2637.
5. Nagler, RH (2014) Adverse outcomes associated with media exposure to contradictory nutrition messages. J Health Commun 19, 2440.
6. Nagler, RH & Hornik, RC (2012) Measuring media exposure to contradictory health information: a comparative analysis of four potential measures. Commun Methods Meas 6, 5675.
7. Spiteri Cornish, L & Moraes, C (2015) The impact of consumer confusion on nutrition literacy and subsequent dietary behavior. Psychol Mark 32, 558574.
8. Vardeman, JE & Aldoory, L (2008) A qualitative study of how women make meaning of contradictory media messages about the risks of eating fish. Health Commun 23, 282291.
9. Lee, CJ, Nagler, RH & Wang, N (2018) Source-specific exposure to contradictory nutrition information: documenting prevalence and effects on adverse cognitive and behavioral outcomes. Health Commun 33, 453461.
10. Pew Research Center (2016) The new food fights: US public divides over food science. (accessed October 2018).
11. Rosenstock, IM (1974) Historical origins of the health belief model. Health Educ Monogr 2, 328335.
12. Fishbein, M & Ajzen, I (2009) Predicting and Changing Behavior: The Reasoned Action Approach. New York: Psychology Press.
13. Hornik, R & Kelly, B (2006) Communication and diet: an overview of experience and principles. J Nutr Educ Behav 39, Suppl. 2, S5S12.
14. Snyder, LB (2006) Health communication campaigns and their impact on behavior. J Nutr Educ Behav 39, Suppl. 2, S32S40.
15. Wakefield, MA, Loken, B & Hornik, RC (2010) Use of mass media campaigns to change health behaviour. Lancet 376, 12611271.
16. McCombs, M & Shaw, D (1972) The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opin Q 36, 176187.
17. Scheufele, DA (1999) Framing as a theory of media effects. J Commun 49, 103122.
18. Niederdeppe, J, Fowler, EF, Goldstein, K et al. (2010) Does local television news coverage cultivate fatalistic beliefs about cancer prevention? J Commun 60, 230253.
19. Angell, M & Kassirer, JP (1994) Clinical research: what should the public believe? N Engl J Med 331, 189190.
20. Goldberg, JP & Hellwig, JP (1997) Nutrition research in the media: the challenge facing scientists. J Am Coll Nutr 16, 544550.
21. Basu, AJ & Hogard, E (2008) Fit for public consumption? An exploratory study of the reporting of nutrition research in UK tabloids with regard to its accuracy, and a preliminary investigation of public attitudes towards it. Public Health Nutr 11, 11241131.
22. Boyington, JEA, Schoster, B, Martin, KR et al. (2009) Perceptions of individual and community environmental influences on fruit and vegetable intake, North Carolina, 2004. Prev Chronic Dis 6, A04.
23. Diekman, C & Malcolm, K (2009) Consumer perception and insights on fats and fatty acids: knowledge on the quality of diet fat. Ann Nutr Metab 54, 2532.
24. Dorey, E & McCool, J (2009) The role of the media in influencing children’s nutritional perceptions. Qual Health Res 19, 645654.
25. Dye, CJ & Cason, KL (2005) Perceptions of older, low-income women about increasing intake of fruits and vegetables. J Nutr Elder 25, 2141.
26. Chang, C (2013) Men’s and women’s responses to two-sided health news coverage: a moderated mediation model. J Health Commun 18, 13261344.
27. Chang, C (2015) Motivated processing: how people perceive news covering novel or contradictory health research findings. Sci Commun 37, 602634.
28. Nagler, RH & LoRusso, SM (2017) Conflicting information and message competition in health and risk messaging. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. Published online: July 2017. doi: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.292.
29. O’Keefe, DJ (1999) How to handle opposing arguments in persuasive messages: a meta-analytic review of the effects of one-sided and two-sided messages. Ann Int Commun 22, 209249.
30. Dehghan, M, Mente, A, Zhang, X et al. (2017) Associations of fats and carbohydrate intake with cardiovascular disease and mortality in 18 countries from five continents (PURE): a prospective cohort study. Lancet 390, 20502062.
31. Noto, H, Goto, A, Tsujimoto, T et al. (2013) Low-carbohydrate diets and all-cause mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. PLoS One 8, e55030.
32. Bakalar, N (2017) New study favors fat over carbs. (accessed September 2018).
33. Park, A (2017) The low-fat vs. low-carb diet debate has a new answer. (accessed September 2018).
34. Carroll, AE (2015) Are fats unhealthy? The battle over dietary guidelines. (accessed September 2018).
35. Taubes, G (2002) What if it’s all been a big fat lie? (accessed September 2018).
36. Miller, JD (2004) Public understanding of, and attitudes toward, scientific research: what we know and what we need to know. Public Underst Sci 13, 273294.
37. Jensen, JD, Krakow, M, John, KK et al. (2013) Against conventional wisdom: when the public, the media, and medical practice collide. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 13, S4.
38. Nelkin, D (1995) Selling Science: How the Press Covers Science and Technology. New York: W.H. Freeman.
39. Pellechia, MG (1997) Trends in science coverage: a content analysis of three US newspapers. Public Underst Sci 6, 4968.
40. Carpenter, DM, Geryk, LL, Chen, AT et al. (2016) Conflicting health information: a critical research need. Health Expect 19, 11731182.
41. Buhrmester, MD, Talaifar, S & Gosling, SD (2018) An evaluation of Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, its rapid rise, and its effective use. Perspect Psychol Sci 13, 149154.
42. Jensen, JD, Carcioppolo, N, King, AJ et al. (2011) Including limitations in news coverage of cancer research: effects of news hedging on fatalism, medical skepticism, patient trust, and backlash. J Health Commun 16, 486503.
43. Patterson, RE, Satia, JA, Kristal, AR et al. (2001) Is there a consumer backlash against the diet and health message? J Am Diet Assoc 101, 3741.
44. Kliemann, N, Wardle, J, Johnson, F et al. (2016) Reliability and validity of a revised version of the General Nutrition Knowledge Questionnaire. Eur J Nutr 70, 11741180.
45. National Cancer Institute (2011) Health Information National Trends (HINTS) 4 survey, cycle 1, 2011. (accessed April 2018).
46. Nagler, RH, Yzer, MC & Rothman, AJ (2019) Effects of media exposure to conflicting information about mammography: results from a population-based survey experiment. Ann Behav Med 53, 896908.
47. Ramondt, S & Ramírez, AS (2019) Assessing the impact of the public nutrition information environment: adapting the cancer information overload scale to measure diet information overload. Patient Educ Couns 102, 3742.
48. Jeong, M, Zhang, D, Morgan, JC et al. (2019) Similarities and differences in tobacco control research findings from convenience and probability samples. Ann Behav Med 53, 476485.
49. Jensen, JD (2008) Scientific uncertainty in news coverage of cancer research: effects of hedging on scientists’ and journalists’ credibility. Hum Comm Res 34, 347369.
50. Ioannidis, JA (2018) The challenge of reforming nutritional epidemiologic research. JAMA 320, 969970.


Confusion and nutritional backlash from news media exposure to contradictory information about carbohydrates and dietary fats

  • Danielle Clark (a1), Rebekah H Nagler (a2) and Jeff Niederdeppe (a1)


Altmetric attention score

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