Consumer confusion about wholegrain content and healthfulness in product labels: a discrete choice experiment and comprehension assessment

Abstract

Objective: Using a legal standard for scrutinising the regulation of food label claims, this study assessed whether consumers are misled about wholegrain (WG) content and product healthfulness based on common product labels. Design: First, a discrete choice experiment used pairs of hypothetical products with different amounts of WG, sugar and salt to measure effects on assessment of healthfulness; and second, a WG content comprehension assessment used actual product labels to assess respondent understanding. Setting: Online national panel survey. Participants: For a representative sample of US adults (n 1030), survey responses were collected in 2018 and analysed in 2019. Results: First, 29–47 % of respondents incorrectly identified the healthier product from paired options, and respondents who self-identified as having difficulty in understanding labels were more likely to err. Second, for actual products composed primarily of refined grains, 43–51 % of respondents overstated the WG content, whereas for one product composed primarily of WG, 17 % of respondents understated the WG content. Conclusions: The frequency of consumer misunderstanding of grain product labels was high in both study components. Potential policies to address consumer confusion include requiring disclosure of WG content as a percentage of total grain content or requiring disclosure of the grams of WG v. refined grains per serving.

The National Clinical Care Commission Report to Congress: Leveraging Federal Policies and Programs for Population-Level Diabetes Prevention and Control: Recommendations From the National Clinical Care Commission

“…To fulfill one of the FDA’s goals of supporting informed consumer decision making, the agency should ensure that food labels are truthful, not misleading, and provide clarity for consumers seeking a healthy diet. For example, the FDA should enhance regulations to ensure that objective, science-based standards are used when products use the term “whole grain” ( 102 ) and provide clarity around labels such as “toddler milks,” “transition formulas,” and “recommended” or “necessary” for these products. The FDA should also mandate scientific evidence for all health claims and require disclaimers that such products are not intended for children aged <12 months or as a substitute for breastmilk or infant formula ( 103 , 104 ).…”

Fibre intake for optimal health: how can healthcare professionals support people to reach dietary recommendations?

“…People are unlikely to understand the type or quantity of individual foods or food combinations needed to achieve recommended dietary fibre intakes. Coupled with this, some consumers do not recognise the contribution of whole grains to fibre intake, and others do not know how to identify wholegrain, compared with refined grain, products 1718. Despite the purported health benefits of dietary fibre, many consumers are eating highly processed, refined grains and too few fruits and vegetables, and some consumers might actively avoid carbohydrate rich foods for the health benefits purportedly associated with low carbohydrate diets.…”

“…Coupled with this, some consumers do not recognise the contribution of whole grains to fibre intake, and others do not know how to identify wholegrain, compared with refined grain, products. 17 18 Despite the purported health benefits of dietary fibre, many consumers are eating highly processed, refined grains and too few fruits and vegetables, and some consumers might actively avoid carbohydrate rich foods for the health benefits purportedly associated with low carbohydrate diets. People in both situations are likely to fall short of meeting fibre recommendations.…”

‘Consumer confusion about wholegrain content and healthfulness in product labels’ overlooks widely available nutrition communication tool

“…We read with interest the research article by Wilde et al on consumer confusion about wholegrain content and healthfulness (1) . Given that the 'discrete choice experiment' designed by the authors contained hypothetical products that were intentionally designed to confuse consumers and are not reflective of products found in the retail marketplace, we question whether the high consumer confusion found in the study can be extrapolated to real-world scenarios.…”