CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 211Consumer Attitudes and Food LabelingNutrition, Health and Food BehaviorSensory Analysis and Statistical Methods

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Impact of Product Name on Dieters’ and Nondieters’ Food Evaluations and Consumption

Irmak, Caglar, Vallen, Beth, Robinson, Stefanie Rosen·2011·Journal of Consumer Research
DOI 10.1086/660044
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This research explores the impact of merely altering the name of a food on dieters’ and nondieters’ evaluations of the food’s healthfulness and taste, as well as consumption. Four studies demonstrate that when a food is identified by a relatively unhealthy name (e.g., pasta), dieters perceive the item to be less healthful and less tasty than do nondieters. When the identical food is assigned a relatively healthy name (e.g., salad), however, dieting tendency has no effect on product evaluations. This effect, which results in differences in actual food consumption, is explained by nondieters’ insensitivity to food cues as well as dieters’ reliance on cues indicating a lack of healthfulness and tendency to employ heuristic information processing when evaluating foods. These findings contribute to the body of literature that explores both individual and contextual factors that influence food evaluation and consumption.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/660044

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 48 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Buia, 2003, ;Water, Water Everywhere … and Calories Too, Time, 160, 69
  2. Consumer Reports on Health, 2007, Veggie Chips: Trick or Treat?, 19, 7
  3. Food and Drug Administration, 2009, Title 21: Food and Drugs
  4. Newman, 2009, Got Milk? For Sports Drink Maker, Nestlé Says No
  5. Newsweek, 2003, Smoothie Operator, 142, 64
  6. Teinowitz, 2009, Coca-Cola Sued for Marketing Vitaminwater as Healthy

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–211 of 211

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Irmak, C., Vallen, B., & Robinson, S. R.
Affiliations
  • University of South Carolina (US)
  • Loyola University Maryland (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Consumer Research
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2011-04-12
Volume
38
Issue
2
Pages
390-405
ISSN
  • 0093-5301 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5277
DOI
10.1086/660044
OpenAlex
W2130102285
Cited by
211
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
FWCI
11.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Consumer Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
Keywords
food naming, product names, dieters, food evaluation, perceived healthiness, taste perception, dietary intake, food cues, heuristic processing

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