The impact of front-of-package claims, fruit images, and health warnings on consumers' perceptions of sugar-sweetened fruit drinks: Three randomized experiments

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

We aimed to examine the impact of claims, fruit images, and health warnings on consumers' perceptions of fruit-flavored drinks with added sugar (i.e., “fruit drinks”). We conducted three 2x2x2 randomized experiments with online convenience samples of U.S. adults (Study 1 n = 2139 in 2018, current e-cigarette users and smokers; Study 2 n = 670 in 2018, current e-cigarette users; Study 3 n = 1006 in 2019, general sample). Participants viewed a fruit drink that differed in the presence of a “100% Vitamin C” claim, a fruit image, or a health warning. On average across the three studies, consumers who saw a claim on a fruit drink believed that the drink was more healthful than those who did not see the claim (mean average differential effect (ADE) = 0.66, p < .001); they were also more interested in consuming the drink (mean ADE = 0.38, p = .001). The health warning decreased perceived product healthfulness (mean ADE = -0.65, p < .001) and consumption interest (mean ADE = -0.49, p < .001). The fruit image had no effect on perceived product healthfulness (mean ADE = 0.03, p = .81) or purchase intentions (mean ADE = -0.04, p = .77). In Study 1 and Study 2, there were no interactions between claims, images, or warnings (all p > .05). In Study 3, the “100% Vitamin C” nutrition claim only increased perceived product healthfulness when the drink did not also have a health warning (interaction p < .05). These findings suggest that 100% Vitamin C claims increase the appeal of fruit drinks, whereas health warnings decrease the appeal. Together, these studies support policies to restrict marketing and require health warnings on sugar-sweetened beverage packaging.