The authors report the results of three experiments that address the effects of health claims and nutrition information placed on restaurant menus and packaged food labels. The results indicate that when favorable nutrition information or health claims are presented, consumers have more favorable attitudes toward the product, nutrition attitudes, and purchase intentions, and they perceive risks of heart disease and stroke to be lower. The nutritional context in which a restaurant menu item is presented moderates the effects of both nutrition information and a health claim on consumer evaluations, which suggests that alternative (i.e., nontarget) menu items serve as a frame of reference against which the target menu item is evaluated.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

In this study a confirmatory methodology was implemented to analyze a model that uses the Rizzo, House, and Lirtzman (1970) scales of role conflict (RC) and role ambiguity (RA; i.e., the Bedeian and Armenakis, 1981, model). The validity of the RC and RA scales were examined through structural equations analysis, and a nested models approach was used to compare the Bedeian and Armenakis model with a model suggesting a more parsimonious representation of the data. Furthermore, path estimates from models incorporating random measurement error were compared with estimates from a model not incorporating the effects of random measurement error. Results indicate that the RC and RA measures meet some established thresholds of convergent and discriminant validity. However, the causal results suggest a more parsimonious representation of the effects of RC and RA than that posited by Bedeian and Armenakis.The effects of role conflict and role ambiguity on a number of job-related attitudes and behaviors have been studied extensively. The meta-analyses of Fisher and Gitelson (1983) and Jackson and Schuler (1985) suggested that the impact of role conflict (RC) and role ambiguity (RA) on job-related attitudes and behaviors is pervasive. These constructs have been associated with lower levels of job satisfaction, commitment, and job involvement as well as higher levels of tension and propensity to leave an organization (Jackson & Schuler, 1985).Although research on RC and RA is abundant, only a few studies have developed and tested causal models of the outcomes of role conflict and role ambiguity (e.g., Bedeian & Armenakis, 1981;Jackson, 1983;Kemery, Bedeian, Mossholder, & Touliatos, 1985). Although these studies have provided insight regarding the causal flow of RC and RA on job-related attitudes and behaviors, models estimating measurement error and causal paths simultaneously have rarely been examined. Researchers have recently suggested that the operationalization of many constructs, including RC and RA (Tracy & Johnson, 1981), may contain sufficient measurement error to bias estimates of the relationships among latent variables (Goldberger, 1971;James, Mulaik, & Brett, 1982;Kenny, 1979). As a result, there is a need to examine RC and RA within models that assess causal relationships among constructs and measurement error simultaneously.The issue of measurement error is especially relevant to research on role conflict and ambiguity because of the dependence on two scales to measure these constructs. As noted by Van Sell, Brief, and Schuler (1981), the vast majority of research We would like to thank Art Bedeian, Rodger Griffeth, Ed Kemery, Subhash Sharma, and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article.