MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200226337

Impact of front-of-pack labels on the perceived healthfulness of a sweetened fruit drink: A randomised experiment in five countries

2022· article· en· W4200226337 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gary Sacks

Bibliographic record

VenueOwn your potential (DEAKIN) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicConsumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionMedicineEnvironmental healthNutrition facts labelSample (material)Psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

\n\t\t\t\t\t<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec id="S1368980021004535_as1"><jats:title>Objective:</jats:title><jats:p>Front-of-pack (FOP) nutrition labelling is a globally recommended strategy to encourage healthier food choices. We evaluated the effect of FOP labels on the perceived healthfulness of a sweetened fruit drink in an international sample of adult consumers.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec id="S1368980021004535_as2"><jats:title>Design:</jats:title><jats:p>Six-arm randomised controlled experiment to examine the impact of FOP labels (no label control, Guideline Daily Amounts (GDA), Multiple Traffic Lights, the Health Star Ratings (HSR), Health Warning Labels, and ‘High-in’ Warning Labels (HIWL)) on the perceived healthfulness of the drink. Linear regression models by country examined healthfulness perceptions on FOP nutrition labels, testing for interactions by demographic characteristics.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec id="S1368980021004535_as3"><jats:title>Setting:</jats:title><jats:p>Online survey in 2018 among participants from Australia, Canada, Mexico, United Kingdom (UK) and United States.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec id="S1368980021004535_as4"><jats:title>Participants:</jats:title><jats:p>Adults (≥18 years, <jats:italic>n</jats:italic> 22 140).</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec id="S1368980021004535_as5"><jats:title>Results:</jats:title><jats:p>Compared with control, HIWL had the greatest impact in lowering perceived healthfulness (<jats:italic>β</jats:italic> from −0·62 to −1·71) across all countries. The HIWL and the HSR had a similar effect in Australia. Other labels were effective in decreasing the perceived healthfulness of the drink within some countries only, but to a lower extent. The GDA did not reduce perceived healthfulness in most countries. In the UK, the effect of HIWL differed by age group, with greater impact among older participants (> 40 years). There were no other variations across key demographic characteristics.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec id="S1368980021004535_as6"><jats:title>Conclusions:</jats:title><jats:p>HIWL, which communicates clear, non-quantitative messages about high levels of nutrients of concern, demonstrated the greatest efficacy to decrease the perceived healthfulness of a sweetened fruit drink across countries. This effect was similar across demographic characteristics.</jats:p></jats:sec>\n\t\t\t\t

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.288 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOwn your potential (DEAKIN)Same topicConsumer Attitudes and Food LabelingFrench-language works237,207