Impact of warning labels on sugar-sweetened beverages on parental selection: An online experimental study.

Eleni Mantzari, Milica Vasiljevic, Isabelle Turney, Mark Pilling, Theresa Marteau
Author Information
  1. Eleni Mantzari: Behaviour and Health Research Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.
  2. Milica Vasiljevic: Behaviour and Health Research Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.
  3. Isabelle Turney: Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, UK.
  4. Mark Pilling: Behaviour and Health Research Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.
  5. Theresa Marteau: Behaviour and Health Research Unit, University of Cambridge, UK.

Abstract

Sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are one of the largest added sugar sources to diets in the UK and USA, particularly among young people. Warning labels, including calorie information labels, could reduce SSB consumption but uncertainty surrounds the labels that are most effective. This study assessed the impact of labels containing (a) each of two image-based warnings and (b) calorie information, singly and together, on SSB selection by parents of 11-16-year-olds living in the UK. Using a 3 (disease image, sugar content image, no image) × 2 (calorie information, no calorie information) between-subjects experimental design, 2002 participants were randomised to see beverages with one of six labels and selected one for their child to consume. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants selecting an SSB. Data were collected in December 2017. Logistic regressions showed SSB selection was lower when labels contained an image-based warning (35%), compared to not having any label (49%) or just calorie information (43.5%). The disease image lowered selection more than the sugar image (32% vs 40.5%). Providing calorie information with the disease image had no additional impact on selection (33%) but enhanced the impact of the sugar image (36%). Image-based warning labels discourage SSB selection by parents for their children. Images depicting health consequences of excess sugar consumption have larger effects than those depicting sugar content. Calorie information does not add to the effect of the former but does to that of the latter. Field studies are needed to assess the impact of SSB warning labels in real-life settings.

Keywords

References

  1. Ann Behav Med. 2018 Jan 5;52(1):53-64 [PMID: 28488230]
  2. J Behav Med. 2017 Jun;40(3):520-529 [PMID: 28120228]
  3. Behav Neurosci. 2007 Dec;121(6):1156-62 [PMID: 18085868]
  4. Am J Public Health. 2012 Feb;102(2):329-35 [PMID: 22390447]
  5. Appetite. 2014 Dec;83:10-8 [PMID: 25108238]
  6. Psychol Health. 2018 Feb;33(2):213-234 [PMID: 28385093]
  7. J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Sep;27(9):1127-34 [PMID: 22539069]
  8. Tob Control. 2006 Jun;15 Suppl 3:iii19-25 [PMID: 16754942]
  9. Am J Prev Med. 2007 Mar;32(3):202-9 [PMID: 17296472]
  10. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2016 Sep 01;13(1):95 [PMID: 27580589]
  11. BMC Neurosci. 2007 Feb 22;8:16 [PMID: 17316444]
  12. PLoS One. 2016 Apr 22;11(4):e0153027 [PMID: 27105210]
  13. Addiction. 1997 Nov;92(11):1427-35 [PMID: 9519486]
  14. Health Educ Res. 2015 Feb;30(1):46-56 [PMID: 24974219]
  15. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Feb 28;15(3): [PMID: 29495581]
  16. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006 Aug;84(2):274-88 [PMID: 16895873]
  17. Soc Sci Med. 2016 Sep;164:118-129 [PMID: 27423739]
  18. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 27;2:CD009315 [PMID: 29482264]
  19. Kidney Int. 2010 Apr;77(7):609-16 [PMID: 20032963]
  20. Am J Public Health. 2007 Apr;97(4):667-75 [PMID: 17329656]
  21. Appetite. 2018 Sep 1;128:233-241 [PMID: 29879450]
  22. BMC Public Health. 2013 Aug 15;13:756 [PMID: 23947336]
  23. PLoS One. 2015 Dec 16;10(12):e0142879 [PMID: 26672982]
  24. J Nutr. 2014 Jun;144(6):856-60 [PMID: 24717367]
  25. Neuroimage. 2009 May 1;45(4):1212-9 [PMID: 19349235]
  26. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Apr;89(4):1037-42 [PMID: 19211821]
  27. Public Health Nutr. 2018 Feb;21(3):543-557 [PMID: 29173214]
  28. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005 Sep;14(9):2098-105 [PMID: 16172216]
  29. Health Psychol. 2016 Aug;35(8):847-51 [PMID: 27505205]
  30. Nutrients. 2018 Jan 17;10(1):null [PMID: 29342109]
  31. Z Gesundh Wiss. 2017;25(2):147-154 [PMID: 28357194]
  32. Tob Control. 2003 Dec;12(4):391-5 [PMID: 14660774]
  33. Nutrients. 2017 Nov 24;9(12): [PMID: 29186803]
  34. Nutr Rev. 2006 Apr;64(4):153-74 [PMID: 16673752]
  35. Tob Control. 1997 Winter;6(4):317-25 [PMID: 9583630]
  36. Am J Prev Med. 2016 Nov;51(5):664-672 [PMID: 27617366]
  37. Diabetes Care. 2010 Nov;33(11):2477-83 [PMID: 20693348]
  38. Health Psychol. 2011 Mar;30(2):195-203 [PMID: 21401253]
  39. Prev Med. 2014 Jun;63:52-7 [PMID: 24631499]
  40. Neuroimage Clin. 2018 Mar 07;18:702-712 [PMID: 29564209]
  41. Am J Public Health. 2014 Dec;104(12):2417-24 [PMID: 25322298]
  42. Am J Prev Med. 2018 Feb;54(2):197-204 [PMID: 29249555]
  43. JAMA Intern Med. 2016 Jul 1;176(7):905-12 [PMID: 27273839]
  44. Public Health Nutr. 2008 Feb;11(2):203-13 [PMID: 17601362]
  45. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2011 May-Aug;4(2):119-23 [PMID: 27672250]
  46. Am J Public Health. 2004 Aug;94(8):1442-5 [PMID: 15284057]
  47. J Cogn Neurosci. 2010 Feb;22(2):248-62 [PMID: 19400679]
  48. Pediatrics. 2016 Feb;137(2):e20153185 [PMID: 26768346]
  49. Circulation. 2010 Mar 23;121(11):1356-64 [PMID: 20308626]
  50. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996 Dec;49(12):1373-9 [PMID: 8970487]
  51. BMJ. 2012 Jan 15;346:e7492 [PMID: 23321486]
  52. Soc Sci Med. 2018 Jan;197:226-234 [PMID: 29096946]
  53. Appetite. 2018 Feb 1;121:360-365 [PMID: 29191745]
  54. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014 Dec;73(12):2101-6 [PMID: 24026676]
  55. Neuroimage. 2007 Mar;35(1):430-40 [PMID: 17239620]
  56. Journal Mass Commun Q. 2017 Jun 01;94(2):416-442 [PMID: 29975497]
  57. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2011 Feb;35(1):88-9 [PMID: 21299710]
  58. Ann Behav Med. 2015 Aug;49(4):594-604 [PMID: 25697134]
  59. Tob Control. 2016 May;25(3):341-54 [PMID: 25948713]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0labelsinformationimagesugarcalorieSSBselectionbeveragesimpactwarningSSBsonediseaseSugar-sweetenedUKWarningconsumptionstudyimage-basedwarningsparentscontentexperimentalparticipants5%Image-baseddepictingCalorielargestaddedsourcesdietsUSAparticularlyamongyoungpeopleincludingreduceuncertaintysurroundseffectiveassessedcontainingtwobsinglytogether11-16-year-oldslivingUsing3 × 2between-subjectsdesign2002randomisedseesixselectedchildconsumeprimaryoutcomeproportionselectingDatacollectedDecember2017Logisticregressionsshowedlowercontained35%comparedlabel49%just43lowered32%vs40Providingadditional33%enhanced36%discouragechildrenImageshealthconsequencesexcesslargereffectsaddeffectformerlatterFieldstudiesneededassessreal-lifesettingsImpactsugar-sweetenedparentalselection:onlineEnergyGraphicSugarSweetenedBeverages

Similar Articles

Cited By