Premium
Strength of health‐related claims and their perceived advantage
Author(s) -
Urala Nina,
Arvola Anne,
Lähteenmäki Liisa
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
international journal of food science and technology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.831
H-Index - 96
eISSN - 1365-2621
pISSN - 0950-5423
DOI - 10.1046/j.1365-2621.2003.00737.x
Subject(s) - health claims on food labels , perception , product (mathematics) , psychology , health benefits , social psychology , control (management) , marketing , medicine , business , economics , food science , mathematics , chemistry , geometry , management , neuroscience , traditional medicine
Summary Consumers ( n = 958) were asked to evaluate whether product‐related health claims in foods were either advantageous or disadvantageous, in their opinion. Claims were made for six functional components and two control products, namely low salt content and a high‐pressure technique and the strength of claims varied between four intensity levels. In general, all claims were perceived as neutral or as advantageous. Increasing the strength of the claim did not automatically increase the perceived benefit. Gender, trust in different information sources and the frequency of use of so‐called functional foods affected the perceived benefit. Women perceived the claims to be more beneficial than men did. Trustful respondents perceived the claims as more advantageous than did sceptical respondents, and the users of functional foods perceived health claims to be more advantageous than did non‐users. In addition, personal motivation affected the perception of the claims. With less familiar functional components, the strength of the claim increased the perceived benefit, whereas with familiar components, claims mentioning the reduced risk or prevention of a disease did not increase the perceived advantage.