The Determinants of Discretionary Front-of-Package Food Labelling
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The Determinants of Discretionary Front-of-Package \nFood Labelling \nAnthea Christoforou\nDoctor of Philosophy\nDepartment of Nutritional Sciences \nUniversity of Toronto\n2017\nABSTRACT\nFront-of-package (FOP) nutrition labelling is pervasive in Canada and occurs at the discretion of manufacturers. While there is evidence to suggest FOP labelling can impact product sales, other work has consistently demonstrated no association between the presence of a FOP reference and the nutritional quality of a product. A comprehensive examination of how manufacturers choose to engage in FOP labelling is needed to better understand the implications of this practice for consumers. Drawing on a survey of packaged foods sold in national chain retailers in Toronto the aims of this thesis were 1) to examine how the presence and nature of FOP references relate to a) level of food processing, b) product innovation (focusing on products designed as substitutes for traditional foods), and c) brand; and 2) to assess the nature of unregulated references through a systematic comparison of these references to nutrition labelling regulations. FOP nutrition references were more likely to appear on highly processed products, innovative foods and products manufactured by transnational brands, but they were less frequently displayed on products targeted to discount shoppers. A more in-depth examination of the nature of FOP material revealed a greater propensity for references highlighting ‘nutrients to limit’ (e.g., ‘trans fat free’, ‘low in sodium’) amongst highly processed products and those of transnational brands whereas innovative foods displayed a greater proportion of references which relayed information of ‘positive’ constituents (e.g., ‘good source of calcium’). Transnational brand products were more likely than other products to bear unregulated ‘natural’ references and less likely to display regulated ‘organic’ labels, potentially signalling their need to circumvent regulatory requirements that would vary across markets. Nearly a quarter of products surveyed bore unregulated nutrition references, and most of these relayed information for which regulated options exist. Taken together, the strategic distribution of FOP references observed on highly processed products, innovative products and those manufactured by transnational brands, and the myriad of unregulated text found on these products, suggest FOP labelling functions primarily as a marketing tool and point to the need for a more effective regulatory framework for nutrition communication to better support healthy food selection.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».