Snacks With Nutrition Labels: Tastiness Perception, Healthiness Perception, and Willingness to Pay by Norwegian Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Consumers tend to have the perception that healthy equals less tasty. This study aimed to identify whether information provided by the Keyhole symbol, a widely used front-of-package symbol in Nordic countries to indicate nutritional content, and percent daily values (%DVs) affect Norwegian adolescents' perception of the healthiness of snacks and their intention to buy them. DESIGN: Two tasks were used to evaluate adolescents' perception of snacks with the Keyhole symbol: with %DVs or with no nutrition label. A third task was used to test their abilities to use %DVs (pairwise selections). A survey obtained personal attributes. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 566 Norwegian adolescents. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Taste perception, health perception, and ability to use %DVs. ANALYSIS: Linear mixed models and logistic models that tested effects of labels and personal attributes on main outcome measures. RESULTS: The Keyhole symbol increased health perception without influencing taste perception of snacks. Norwegian adolescents had limited abilities to use information from the %DVs correctly to identify healthier foods. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Norwegian adolescents had a positive perception of the Keyhole symbols. Keyhole symbols as a simple, heuristic front-of-package label have potential as an information strategy that may influence self-efficacy in promoting healthy snack choices among adolescents.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".