Explore the vast range of titles available.

[Display omitted] •Calorie disclosure encourages a reduction of 27 calories for consumers.•Calorie disclosure encourages a reduction of 15 calories for retailers.•Six significant moderators of the effect are identified. In 2018 restaurants in the United States will need to provide calorie information on their menus as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. In the present research, we examine the efficacy of this legislation in reducing restaurant based food calorie consumption. Specifically, we explore the likely effect of the new policy on both the supply and demand side, that is, consumer and retailer behaviors. To achieve this, two studies are included in this research: a meta-analysis of 186 studies investigating the effect of calorie disclosure on calories selected, and a meta-analysis of 41 studies examining the effect of calorie disclosure on calories offered by retailers. Across these two studies we reveal a significant and unequivocal calorie disclosure effect for menu labels; disclosure results in both fewer calories selected (−27 Calories) and fewer calories offered by retailers (−15 Calories).

Background Regulations mandating kilocalorie (kcal) labelling for large businesses in the out-of-home food sector (OHFS) came into force on 6th April 2022 as a policy to reduce obesity in England. To provide indicators of potential reach and impact, kcal labelling practices were studied in the OHFS, and customer purchasing and consumption behaviours prior to implementation of the mandatory kcal labelling policy in England. Methods From August-December 2021, large OHFS businesses subject to the kcal labelling regulations were visited prior to regulations coming into force on 6th April 2022. 3308 customers were recruited from 330 outlets and collected survey information on the number of kcal purchased and consumed by customers, customers’ knowledge of the kcal content of their purchases, and customers noticing and use of kcal labelling. In a subset of 117 outlets, data was collected on nine recommended kcal labelling practices. Results The average number of kcals purchased (1013 kcal, SD = 632 kcal) was high with 69% of purchases exceeding the recommendation of a maximum of 600 kcal per meal. Participants underestimated the energy content of their purchased meals by on average 253 kcal (SD = 644 kcals). In outlets providing kcal labelling in which customer survey data was collected, a minority of customers reported noticing (21%) or using (20%) kcal labelling. Out of the 117 outlets assessed for kcal labelling practices, 24 (21%) provided any in-store kcal labelling. None of the outlets met all nine aspects of recommended labelling practices. Conclusions Prior to implementation of 2022 kcal labelling policy, the majority of sampled OHFS large business outlets in England did not provide kcal labelling. Few customers noticed or used the labels and on average customers purchased and consumed substantially more energy than recommended in public health guidelines. The findings suggest that reliance on voluntary action for kcal labelling implementation failed to produce widespread, consistent, and adequate kcal labelling practices.

Background There are well documented socioeconomic disparities in diet quality and obesity. Menu energy labelling is a public health policy designed to improve diet and reduce obesity. However, it is unclear whether the impact energy labelling has on consumer behaviour is socially equitable or differs based on socioeconomic position (SEP). Methods Systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental (between-subjects) and pre-post implementation field studies examining the impact of menu energy labelling on energy content of food and/or drink selections in higher vs. lower SEP groups. Results Seventeen studies were eligible for inclusion. Meta-analyses of 13 experimental studies that predominantly examined hypothetical food and drink choices showed that energy labelling tended to be associated with a small reduction in energy content of selections that did not differ based on participant SEP (X 2 (1) = 0.26, p  = .610). Effect estimates for higher SEP SMD = 0.067 [95% CI: -0.092 to 0.226] and lower SEP SMD = 0.115 [95% CI: -0.006 to 0.237] were similar. A meta-analysis of 3 pre-post implementation studies of energy labelling in the real world showed that the effect energy labelling had on consumer behaviour did not significantly differ based on SEP (X 2 (1) = 0.22, p  = .636). In higher SEP the effect was SMD = 0.032 [95% CI: -0.053 to 0.117] and in lower SEP the effect was SMD = -0.005 [95% CI: -0.051 to 0.041]. Conclusions Overall there was no convincing evidence that the effect energy labelling has on consumer behaviour significantly differs based on SEP. Further research examining multiple indicators of SEP and quantifying the long-term effects of energy labelling on consumer behaviour in real-world settings is now required. Review registration Registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022312532) and OSF ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/W7RDB ).

Nutrition labels are one strategy being used to combat the increasing prevalence of overweight and obesity in the United States. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 mandates that calorie labels be added to menu boards of chain restaurants with 20 or more locations. This systematic review includes seven studies published since the last review on the topic in 2008. Authors searched for peer-reviewed studies using PUBMED and Google Scholar. Included studies used an experimental or quasi-experimental design comparing a calorie-labeled menu with a no-calorie menu and were conducted in laboratories, college cafeterias, and fast food restaurants. Two of the included studies were judged to be of good quality, and five of were judged to be of fair quality. Observational studies conducted in cities after implementation of calorie labeling were imprecise in their measure of the isolated effects of calorie labels. Experimental studies conducted in laboratory settings were difficult to generalize to real world behavior. Only two of the seven studies reported a statistically significant reduction in calories purchased among consumers using calorie-labeled menus. The current evidence suggests that calorie labeling does not have the intended effect of decreasing calorie purchasing or consumption.

Introduction: Childhood obesity is a serious public health concern internationally, and population-level interventions are needed to support healthy food choices. Existing reviews of menu labelling have focused predominantly on adults. However, childhood and adolescence are distinct periods of development during which longer term eating behaviours and food preferences are established. Although some studies have examined the effect of menu labelling among children and adolescents, no reviews have synthesised this evidence. Objective: To assess whether menu labelling influences the amount of calories ordered by children and adolescents (or parents on behalf of youth) in food outlets including restaurants and cafeterias. Methods: Comprehensive literature searches were conducted in Medline, Scopus, PsycINFO, CINAHL, SocINDEX and Embase databases. Eleven relevant studies were identified from an initial search yielding 1,682 results. Studies were assessed using a validated quality assessment tool. Results: Examinations of hypothetical food purchases in artificial environments suggest that menu labelling may be efficacious in reducing calories purchased for or by children and adolescents. Real-world studies are less supportive, although school-based studies were generally positive. It is unclear whether contextual or interpretive menu-labelling formats are more effective compared to numeric calorie information alone. Conclusion: Evidence supporting the impact of menu labelling on lowering the energy content of restaurant and cafeteria food choices made for or by children or adolescents is limited. There remains a need for high-quality studies conducted in real-world settings.

Objectives. We explored the effect of a culturally targeted calorie label intervention on food purchasing behavior of elementary school students. Method. We used a quasi-experimental design with two intervention schools and one control school to assess food purchases of third through fifth graders at standardized school food sales before and after the intervention (immediate and delayed) in schools. The intervention comprised three 1-hour assembly-style hip-hop–themed multimedia classes. Results. A mean total of 225 children participated in two baseline preintervention sales with and without calorie labels; 149 children participated in immediate postintervention food sales, while 133 children participated in the delayed sales. No significant change in purchased calories was observed in response to labels alone before the intervention. However, a mean decline in purchased calories of 20% (p < .01) and unhealthy foods (p < .01) was seen in immediately following the intervention compared to baseline purchases, and this persisted without significant decay after 7 days and 12 days. Conclusion. A 3-hour culturally targeted calorie label intervention may improve food-purchasing behavior of children.

Background This study used focus groups to pilot and evaluate a new nutrition label format and refine the label design. Physical activity equivalent labels present calorie information in terms of the amount of physical activity that would be required to expend the calories in a specified food item. Methods Three focus groups with a total of twenty participants discussed food choices and nutrition labeling. They provided information on comprehension, usability and acceptability of the label. A systematic coding process was used to apply descriptive codes to the data and to identify emerging themes and attitudes. Results Participants in all three groups were able to comprehend the label format. Discussion about label format focused on issues including gender of the depicted figure, physical fitness of the figure, preference for walking or running labels, and preference for information in miles or minutes. Feedback from earlier focus groups was used to refine the labels in an iterative process. Conclusions In contrast to calorie labels, participants shown physical activity labels asked and answered, “How does this label apply to me?” This shift toward personalized understanding may indicate that physical activity labels offer an advantage over currently available nutrition labels.

PurposeThis study puts forth a consumer-oriented concept of clean labels and attempts to empirically investigate consumer perceptions of these labels.Design/methodology/approachA self-administered survey (n = 346) was used as the research instrument for data collection in the current study.FindingsResults from an online survey indicate that consumers perceived less processed, elimination of undesired ingredients and ethical concerns as salient attributes associated with clean labels. Consumer-perceived benefits of these attributes include healthiness, social responsibility, sensory appeal, reliable product and low calorie. Additionally, canonical correlation analysis yields two significant associations between clean label attributes and the corresponding benefits. Attributes of elimination of undesired ingredients and utilization of familiar elements drive the benefits of healthiness, low calorie and social responsibility. Attributes of being less processed and with simple ingredients are associated with the benefit of sensory appeal.Originality/valueThis study systematically investigates the discrete clean halo effect by empirically examining the associations between the clean label attributes and the dimensionalities of benefits as perceived by consumers.

Food and beverage manufacturers now regularly display “just below” calorie amounts (e.g., 99, 199, 299) in advertisements, presumably to appeal to health-motivated consumers. “Just below” values are those that fall one or more digits below a round number, most commonly seen as nine-ending numbers. However, although nine-ending prices are known to stimulate purchase intent, it is unclear whether or when nine-ending calorie labeling shapes food preferences. The present research shows that when consumers view indulgent foods with just-below (vs. round-ending) calorie amounts, they exhibit higher consumption intentions, purchase intent, and consumption behavior, yet only if they are high in health motivation. This is due to a tendency for health-motivated consumers to overweigh the leftmost digit in multidigit numbers—a cognitive bias known as the “level effect.” This bias results in the perception that just-below (vs. round) -ending indulgent foods have relatively fewer calories, decreasing anticipated guilt and increasing consumption intentions and behavior. The superiority of just-below calorie presentation under health motivation is attenuated with the addition of reference intake labeling (i.e., % daily calorie intake values), which equalizes the magnitude of nine- and round-ending calorie indulgent foods.

Background Menu labelling, and more specifically calorie labelling, has been posited as an intervention to improve nutrition literacy and the healthfulness of consumers’ food purchases. However, there is some concern calorie labelling may unintentionally trigger or exacerbate disordered eating among vulnerable persons. The purpose of this research was to explore young adults’ experiences with labelling, with a focus on its implications for their relationships with food. Methods Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants from a campus-based menu labelling study. Interview data were inductively coded using thematic analysis and supported by survey data assessing disordered eating, body esteem, and related constructs. Results The sample consisted of 13 participants (10 women, 3 men), most of whom perceived themselves as “about the right weight” (62%). Four key themes included: (1) participants’ support of and skepticism about labelling interventions, (2) the identification of knowledge and autonomy as mechanisms of labelling interventions, (3) the role of the individual’s and others’ relationships with food in experiences with labelling, and (4) disordered eating and dieting as lenses that shape experiences with interventions. Participants’ perceptions of and experiences with calorie labels were shaped by gender, body esteem, and disordered eating risk. Conclusions The results provide insight into the complexity of young adults’ interactions with labelling interventions and context for future research exploring the unintended consequences of public health nutrition interventions.