全面的可持续标签比单一特征的可持续标签更好吗?生态分数和有机标签对食品认知和支付意愿的影响。

IF 4.6 2区 医学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES Appetite Pub Date : 2024-09-10 DOI:10.1016/j.appet.2024.107670
Sumayya Shaikh , Amanda P. Yamim , Carolina O.C. Werle
{"title":"全面的可持续标签比单一特征的可持续标签更好吗?生态分数和有机标签对食品认知和支付意愿的影响。","authors":"Sumayya Shaikh ,&nbsp;Amanda P. Yamim ,&nbsp;Carolina O.C. Werle","doi":"10.1016/j.appet.2024.107670","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Front-of-Package (FOP) labels have been used to inform consumers about the nutritional quality, specific attributes, and, more recently, the sustainability impact of food products. For nutritional labels, there is evidence that all-encompassing labels providing a summary score of a product's nutritional quality are effective in influencing consumer behavior, however less is known about the impact of sustainable labels. This research compares an all-encompassing sustainable label summarizing several sustainable product's features into one score, to a one-trait sustainable label focusing on one sustainable attribute. Two controlled online experiments compare an all-encompassing label (i.e., Eco-Score) to a one-trait label (i.e., organic label) and test how their presence influences consumers' willingness to pay. Study 1 (N = 290) shows that a positive all-encompassing sustainable label (Eco-Score B) does not result in a greater willingness to pay for a box of cereal when compared to no label, and to a one-trait sustainable label (organic), even though the Eco-Score incorporates the product's organic attribute in its assessment. Study 2 (N = 577) shows that consumers were willing to pay less for a product featuring an all-encompassing positive Eco-Score label, compared to the same product with an organic label. It also tests a mechanism behind this effect related to the perceived benefits evoked by the label: while the Eco-Score is perceived as only providing environmental benefits, the organic label also provides more concrete health benefits (i.e., it is good for one's health). Implications for public policy are discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":242,"journal":{"name":"Appetite","volume":"203 ","pages":"Article 107670"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are all-encompassing better than one-trait sustainable labels? The influence of Eco-Score and organic labels on food perception and willingness to pay\",\"authors\":\"Sumayya Shaikh ,&nbsp;Amanda P. Yamim ,&nbsp;Carolina O.C. Werle\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.appet.2024.107670\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Front-of-Package (FOP) labels have been used to inform consumers about the nutritional quality, specific attributes, and, more recently, the sustainability impact of food products. For nutritional labels, there is evidence that all-encompassing labels providing a summary score of a product's nutritional quality are effective in influencing consumer behavior, however less is known about the impact of sustainable labels. This research compares an all-encompassing sustainable label summarizing several sustainable product's features into one score, to a one-trait sustainable label focusing on one sustainable attribute. Two controlled online experiments compare an all-encompassing label (i.e., Eco-Score) to a one-trait label (i.e., organic label) and test how their presence influences consumers' willingness to pay. Study 1 (N = 290) shows that a positive all-encompassing sustainable label (Eco-Score B) does not result in a greater willingness to pay for a box of cereal when compared to no label, and to a one-trait sustainable label (organic), even though the Eco-Score incorporates the product's organic attribute in its assessment. Study 2 (N = 577) shows that consumers were willing to pay less for a product featuring an all-encompassing positive Eco-Score label, compared to the same product with an organic label. It also tests a mechanism behind this effect related to the perceived benefits evoked by the label: while the Eco-Score is perceived as only providing environmental benefits, the organic label also provides more concrete health benefits (i.e., it is good for one's health). Implications for public policy are discussed.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":242,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Appetite\",\"volume\":\"203 \",\"pages\":\"Article 107670\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Appetite\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195666324004732\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Appetite","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195666324004732","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

包装正面(FOP)标签一直被用来向消费者告知食品的营养质量、特定属性,以及最近的可持续发展影响。就营养标签而言,有证据表明,提供产品营养质量总分的全方位标签能有效影响消费者的行为,但对可持续标签的影响却知之甚少。本研究比较了将多个可持续产品特征归纳为一个分数的全方位可持续标签和专注于一个可持续属性的单特征可持续标签。两个受控在线实验比较了全方位标签(即生态分数)和单一特质标签(即有机标签),并测试了它们的存在如何影响消费者的支付意愿。研究 1(N = 290)显示,与无标签和单特征可持续标签(有机)相比,正面的全方位可持续标签(生态得分 B)不会导致消费者更愿意为一盒麦片付费,即使生态得分在评估中包含了产品的有机属性。研究 2(N = 577)显示,与贴有有机标签的同类产品相比,消费者愿意为贴有全方位正面生态分数标签的产品支付更少的费用。研究还检验了这一效应背后的机制,该机制与标签所唤起的感知利益有关:生态分数被认为只提供环境利益,而有机标签还提供更具体的健康利益(即对人的健康有益)。本文还讨论了对公共政策的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Are all-encompassing better than one-trait sustainable labels? The influence of Eco-Score and organic labels on food perception and willingness to pay
Front-of-Package (FOP) labels have been used to inform consumers about the nutritional quality, specific attributes, and, more recently, the sustainability impact of food products. For nutritional labels, there is evidence that all-encompassing labels providing a summary score of a product's nutritional quality are effective in influencing consumer behavior, however less is known about the impact of sustainable labels. This research compares an all-encompassing sustainable label summarizing several sustainable product's features into one score, to a one-trait sustainable label focusing on one sustainable attribute. Two controlled online experiments compare an all-encompassing label (i.e., Eco-Score) to a one-trait label (i.e., organic label) and test how their presence influences consumers' willingness to pay. Study 1 (N = 290) shows that a positive all-encompassing sustainable label (Eco-Score B) does not result in a greater willingness to pay for a box of cereal when compared to no label, and to a one-trait sustainable label (organic), even though the Eco-Score incorporates the product's organic attribute in its assessment. Study 2 (N = 577) shows that consumers were willing to pay less for a product featuring an all-encompassing positive Eco-Score label, compared to the same product with an organic label. It also tests a mechanism behind this effect related to the perceived benefits evoked by the label: while the Eco-Score is perceived as only providing environmental benefits, the organic label also provides more concrete health benefits (i.e., it is good for one's health). Implications for public policy are discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Appetite
Appetite 医学-行为科学
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
566
审稿时长
13.4 weeks
期刊介绍: Appetite is an international research journal specializing in cultural, social, psychological, sensory and physiological influences on the selection and intake of foods and drinks. It covers normal and disordered eating and drinking and welcomes studies of both human and non-human animal behaviour toward food. Appetite publishes research reports, reviews and commentaries. Thematic special issues appear regularly. From time to time the journal carries abstracts from professional meetings. Submissions to Appetite are expected to be based primarily on observations directly related to the selection and intake of foods and drinks; papers that are primarily focused on topics such as nutrition or obesity will not be considered unless they specifically make a novel scientific contribution to the understanding of appetite in line with the journal's aims and scope.
期刊最新文献
Childcare Staff Feeding Practices Associated with Children's Willingness-to-try-new-foods. Comparison of front-of-package nutrition labelling schemes in Costa Rica: a multi-arm parallel-group randomised controlled trial assessing objective understanding and purchase intention. Does Rejection of Inequality Encourage Green Consumption? The Effect of Power Distance Belief on Organic Food Consumption. "Flavor, fun, and vitamins"? Consumers' Lay Beliefs About Child-Oriented Food Products. Food rejection is associated with tactile sensitivity and tactile appreciation in three-year-old children.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1