CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 31Consumer Attitudes and Food LabelingSensory Analysis and Statistical MethodsConsumer behavior in food and health

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Consumer inferences from different versions of a beta-glucans health claim

Stancu, Violeta, Grunert, Klaus G., Lähteenmäki, Liisa·2017·Food Quality and Preference
DOI 10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.03.001
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Health claims communicate the health benefits of food products. The use of health claims is regulated and the regulation requires that the average consumer is able to understand the health claims, as means to protect consumers from misleading claims. Due to the technical terms used in the authorised health claims and the potential of such claims to mislead consumers, attempts to improve consumer understanding of health claims are relevant. The aim of this study was to elicit the inferences that consumers make from different variations of a beta-glucans health claim in order to gain an understanding of how consumers’ understanding of health claims can be improved. Two methods for elicitation of inferences, the Consumer Understanding Test (CUT) and laddering interviews, were applied in a study conducted among consumers (N=295) in Denmark. Re-wording an authorised health claim or adding information did not improve understanding and could even decrease consumers’ understanding of the claim. Several implications of these findings are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.03.001

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 40 · Cited by 31

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. Ahmad, 2012, Beta glucan: A valuable functional ingredient in foods, Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 52, 201, 10.1080/10408398.2010.499806 · DOI
  2. Anderson, 1983, A spreading activation theory of memory, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 261, 10.1016/S0022-5371(83)90201-3 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Andrews, 1998, Consumer generalization of nutrient content claims in advertising, Journal of Marketing, 62, 62, 10.2307/1252287 · DOI
  4. Ares, 2010, Influence of three non-sensory factors on consumer choice of functional yogurts over regular ones, Food Quality and Preference, 21, 361, 10.1016/j.foodqual.2009.09.002 · DOI
  5. Bartłomiej, 2012, Bioactive compounds in cereal grains – Occurrence, structure, technological significance and nutritional benefits – A review, Food Science and Technology International, 18, 559, 10.1177/1082013211433079 · DOI
  6. Bilman, 2012, Consumer understanding, interpretation and perceived levels of personal responsibility in relation to satiety-related claims, Appetite, 59, 912, 10.1016/j.appet.2012.07.010 · DOI
  7. Chan, 2005, Australian consumers are sceptical about but influenced by claims about fat on food labels, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 59, 148, 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602038 · DOI
  8. Evans, 2008, Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition, Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255, 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Grunert, 2010, Means-end chains-A means to which end?, Marketing ZFP, 32, 30, 10.15358/0344-1369-2010-JRM-1-30 · DOI
  10. Grunert, 1995, Measuring subjective meaning structures by the laddering method: Theoretical considerations and methodological problems, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 12, 209, 10.1016/0167-8116(95)00022-T · DOI
  11. Grunert, 2011, Determinants of consumer understanding of health claims, Appetite, 56, 269, 10.1016/j.appet.2011.01.009 · DOI
  12. Gutman, 1982, A means-end chain model based on consumer categorization processes, Journal of Marketing, 46, 60, 10.2307/3203341 · DOI
  13. Hooker, 2008, Dissecting qualified health claims: Evidence from experimental studies, Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 48, 160, 10.1080/10408390601177704 · DOI
  14. Khader, 2013, Automatic activation of attribute knowledge in heuristic inference from memory, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 372, 10.3758/s13423-012-0334-7 · DOI
  15. Lähteenmäki, 2013, Claiming health in food products, Food Quality and Preference, 27, 196, 10.1016/j.foodqual.2012.03.006 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Leathwood, 2007, Consumer understanding of nutrition and health claims: Sources of evidence, British Journal of Nutrition, 98, 474, 10.1017/S000711450778697X · DOI
  17. Moorman, 1990, The effects of stimulus and consumer characteristics on the utilization of nutrition information, Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 362, 10.1086/208563 · DOI
  18. Orquin, 2015, Consumer judgments of explicit and implied health claims on foods: Misguided but not misled, Food Policy, 51, 144, 10.1016/j.foodpol.2015.01.001 · DOI
  19. Petty, 1986, The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 123, 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Reynolds, 1988, Laddering theory, method, analysis, and interpretation, Journal of Advertising Research, 28, 11
  21. Roe, 1999, The impact of health claims on consumer search and product evaluation outcomes: Results from FDA experimental data, Journal of Marketing & Public Policy, 18, 89, 10.1177/074391569901800110 · DOI
  22. Ross, 1992, Making inferences about missing information: The effects of existing information, Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 14, 10.1086/209282 · DOI
  23. Saba, 2010, Country-wise differences in perception of health-related messages in cereal-based food products, Food Quality and Preference, 21, 385, 10.1016/j.foodqual.2009.09.007 · DOI
  24. Sanchez, 2008, Status and use of food products with health claim (FPHC) in the USA, Japan and France an anthropological perspective, Food Quality and Preference, 19, 682, 10.1016/j.foodqual.2008.06.007 · DOI
  25. Sujan, 1985, Consumer knowledge: Effects on evaluation strategies mediating consumer judgments, Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 31, 10.1086/209033 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Sullivan, 2013, The increasing use of barley and barley by-products in the production of healthier baked goods, Trends in Food Science & Technology, 29, 124, 10.1016/j.tifs.2012.10.005 · DOI
  27. Svederberg, 2011, Swedish consumers’ cognitive approaches to nutrition claims and health claims, Food & Nutrition Research, 55
  28. Urala, 2003, Reasons behind consumers’ functional food choices, Nutrition & Food Science, 33, 148, 10.1108/00346650310488499 · DOI
  29. Wansink, 2004, Front-label health claims: When less is more, Food Policy, 29, 659, 10.1016/j.foodpol.2004.10.004 · DOI
  30. Wong, 2013, Consumer attitudes and understanding of low-sodium claims on food: An analysis of healthy and hypertensive individuals, The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 97, 1288, 10.3945/ajcn.112.052910 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Stancu, V., Grunert, K. G., & Lähteenmäki, L.
Affiliations
Aarhus University (DK)
Corresponding author
Stancu, Violeta
ORCID
Venue
Food Quality and Preference
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-09
Volume
60
Pages
81-95
ISSN
0950-3293 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.03.001
OpenAlex
W2593327955
Cited by
31
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
3.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Food Quality and Preference (publishedVersion)
  • Scopus (Elsevier) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Seventh Framework Programme (311963)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Consumer behavior in food and health
Keywords
health claims, β-glucan, consumer understanding, consumer inference, misleading health claims, laddering interviews, food regulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review