Reducing the negative impact of ultra-processed foods: Consumer response to natural claims, organic claims, and processing level disclosures

Abstract

Drawing from theories related to choice architecture, nudges, and the integration of negative and positive information, this research examines the use of ultra-processing package disclosures in conjunction with favorable food processing claims (e.g., “natural,” “organic”) and nutrient content (e.g., sugar) warnings on perceived food processing level, disease risk evaluations, and purchase intentions. Four studies examine how marketers’ positive claims and disclosures interact to jointly affect consumer evaluations of these outcomes. Results show the usefulness of stop-sign disclosures for ultra-processed foods in counterbalancing the positive inferences created from both unregulated (e.g., natural) and regulated (e.g., organic) package claims on perceived food processing level, which mediates the interaction effects on perceptions of disease risk, healthfulness, and purchase intentions. Because high ultra-processed food consumption has recently been linked to increased obesity, type-2 diabetes, heart disease, and cancer, there are implications of results for CPG marketers, consumers, and the global health community, as well as enhancing the conceptual understanding of efforts to promote consumer well-being.