The Library

Task-based nutrition labelling

Tools

Dunbar, George (George L.). (2010) Task-based nutrition labelling. Appetite, Volume 55 (Number 3). pp. 431-435. ISSN 0195-6663

Full text not available from this repository.

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2010.07.016

Abstract

Task-based interface design principles (TBI) were evaluated as a framework for designing effective nutritional labels. In two experiments a total of 123 people assembled a packed lunch, selecting components using labels in GDA or TBI format, or when given only the names of the foods. Study 1 found that a GDA label helped people make healthier choices than the product name alone, but that for a number of types of food, most people would make the same decision with or without a GDA label. Moreover, decisions were much faster when made with the name alone. Study 2 introduced a TBI label in the context of the more specific task of keeping the salt in the lunch under 1 g. TBI and GDA labels reduced salt equally, but only the TBI label was as quick as the name alone. Labels that are aligned with people's specific objectives are more efficient. TBI is a potentially useful framework, that can be deployed using mobile computing. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Item Type:

Journal Article

Subjects:

B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology
H Social Sciences > HF Commerce

Divisions:

Faculty of Science > Psychology

Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):

Food -- Labeling, Nutrition, Consumer behavior, Design

Journal or Publication Title:

Appetite

Publisher:

Elsevier BV

ISSN:

0195-6663

Official Date:

December 2010

Dates:

Date	Event
December 2010	Published

Volume:

Volume 55

Number:

Number 3

Page Range:

pp. 431-435

Identification Number:

10.1016/j.appet.2010.07.016

Status:

Peer Reviewed

Publication Status:

Published

Access rights to Published version:

Restricted or Subscription Access

References:

BEUC. (2005). Report on European consumers’ perception of food labelling. Brussels:
Bureau Europe´en des Unions de Consommateurs.
BMRB, & University of Surrey, (2008). Comprehension and use of UK nutrition signpost
labelling schemes: Scientific rationale and design. London: Food Standards Agency.
Cowburn, G., & Stockley, L. (2005). Consumer understanding and use of nutrition
labelling. A systematic review. Public Health Nutrition, 8(1), 21–28.
de Bruijn, G.-J. (2010). Understanding college students’ fruit consumption. Integrating
habit strength in the theory of planned behaviour. Appetite, 54(1), 16–22.
Dunbar, G. L. (2005). Evaluating research methods in psychology: A case study approach.
Oxford: BPS/Blackwell.
Food Standards Agency. (2004). Concept testing of labelling of healthy/less healthy foods.
Gerrards Cross: Navigator.
Food Standards Agency. (2005). Quantitative evaluation of alternative food signposting
concepts. London: Synovate.
Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX. A windows display program with millisecond
accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 116–124.
Grunert, K. G., & Wills, J. M. (2007). A review of European research on consumer
response to nutrition information on food labels. Journal of Public Health, 15, 385–
399.
Higginson, C. S., Rayner, M. J., Draper, S., & Kirk, T. R. (2002a). The nutrition label—
Which information is looked at? Nutrition and Food Science, 32(3), 92–99.
Higginson, C. S., Rayner, M. J., Draper, S., & Kirk, T. R. (2002b). How do consumers use
nutrition label information? Nutrition and Food Science, 32(4), 145–152.
Laporte, L., Eyckerman, P., & Zaman, B. (2009). Designing a mobile task based UI for
tourists. Paper presented at the MobileHCI’09, Bonn, Germany.
Mackey, M. A., & Metz, M. (2009). Ease of reading of mandatory information on
Canadian food product labels. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33, 369–
381.
Malam, S., Clegg, S., Kirwan, S., McGinigal, S., & BMRB, (2009). Comprehension and use of
UK nutrition signpost labelling schemes. London Food Standards Agency.
Nayga, R. M. J. (2000). Nutrition knowledge, gender, and food label use. Journal of
Consumer Affairs, 34(1), 97–112.
Oakhill, J., Johnson-Laird, & Garnham, A. (1989). Believability and syllogistic reasoning.
Cognition, 31, 117–140.
Park, C. W., Iyer, E. S., & Smith, D. C. (1989). The effects of situational factors on in-store
grocery shopping behavior. The role of store environment and time available for
shopping. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 422–433.
Steenhuis, I., van Assema, P., van Breukelen, G., & Glanz, K. (2004). The effectiveness of
nutrition labelling in Dutch supermarkets. American Journal of Health Promotion, 18,
221–224.
Stuart, S. A., Schroder, M., Hughes, A., & Bower, J. (2004). Dimensional analysis of
schoolchildren’s food label comprehension. A pilot study. International Journal of
Consumer Studies, 28, 135–146.
Wellman, H. M., & Johnson, C. N. (1982). Children’s understanding of food and its
functions. A preliminary study of the development of concepts of nutrition. Journal
of Applied Developmental Psychology, 3(2), 135–148.
Which?. (2006). Food labelling study. London: Consumers’ Association.