The impact of sugar-related claims on perceived healthfulness, caloric value and expected taste of food products

Food packaging usually includes multiple cues, including claims about nutrients that may modulate how the consumer perceives (and behaves towards) the product. In the current work, we systematically examined how different types of claims about sugar influenced the perception of food product categories (i.e., yogurts, ice creams, cookies, and breakfast cereals). In two experiments (combined n = 406), participants were asked to evaluate the perceived healthfulness, caloric value, and expected taste of products with (vs. without) sugar-related claims. Specifically, the claims were on the sugar content (“0% sugar”, “sugar-free”, “no added sugars”, “low sugar” - Experiment 1) or on the type of sugars or sweeteners of natural origin (“sucrose”, “cane sugar”, “honey” and “stevia” - Experiment 2). Experiment 1 revealed that all products with sugar-related claims were rated as healthier, less caloric, and less tasty than the regular alternatives. Still, products with the “low sugar” claim were perceived as the least healthy, most caloric, and tastiest. In Experiment 2, we observed that products with “stevia” claim were rated as healthier, less caloric, and less tasty than regular products. In both experiments, the frequency of consumption of products with sugar-related claims was positively associated with the general perception of these products, the influence of nutritional information on consumption decisions, attention to sugar intake, and interest in nutrition. Overall, our results show that sugar-related claims may influence consumer's perceptions about food products, but the direction of that influence depends on the type of claim and evaluative dimension.