WHAT THE FOP: EXAMINING THE IMPACT OF FRONT-OF-PACKAGE SERVING SIZE LABELS ON PURCHASE INTENTION THROUGH ANTICIPATED GUILT

(1)

WHAT THE FOP: EXAMINING THE IMPACT OF

FRONT-OF-PACKAGE SERVING SIZE LABELS ON

PURCHASE INTENTION THROUGH

ANTICIPATED GUILT

Sissel Ophof | S2760223

University of Groningen

Faculty of Economics and Business

MSc Marketing Management

(2)

(3)

INTRODUCTION

• Global obesity epidemic (World

Health Organization, 2003) • Trend in marketplace of increased

serving sizes (Young & Nestle, 2002)

Relevance of addressing serving size discrepancies and encouraging healthful

consumption

Integrate into one study:

• Front-of-package (FOP) serving size labels • Anticipated guilt

• Purchase intention • Health consciousness

• Product category (i.e., vice vs. virtue)

Aim:

• Novel insights

• Design effective health interventions

(4)

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Hypothesis 1. FOP serving size labels reporting smaller (vs. larger) serving sizes increase consumers’

purchase intention

Hypothesis 2. Consumers’ anticipated guilt of consuming a product mediates the effect of FOP

serving size labels reporting smaller (vs. larger) serving sizes on consumers’ purchase intention

Hypothesis 3a. The mediating effect of anticipated guilt on the relationship between FOP serving

size labels and purchase intention is more (vs. less) pronounced for consumers high (vs. low) in

health consciousness

Hypothesis 3b. The mediating effect of anticipated guilt on the relationship between FOP serving

size labels and purchase intention is less (vs. more) pronounced for consumers high (vs. low) in

health consciousness

(5)

METHOD

• Online survey

• 107 respondents; 18 – 65 years old; 63.6% female;

mostly Dutch

• Mixed design

• Between-subjects factor à small vs. large serving size

FOP label

• Within-subjects factor à both vices and virtues

• Rate anticipated guilt and purchase intention after

each exposure

• Questions concerning survey experience

(6)

RESULTS

(7)

RESULTS

MAIN ANALYSES | MODERATED

MEDIATION | INTERACTION

0,00 0,50 1,00 1,50 2,00 2,50 3,00 3,50 4,00 4,50 5,00 HC + 1 SD Mean HC HC - 1 SD Anticipated guilt Health Consciousness (HC)

(8)

RESULTS

(9)

RESULTS

MAIN ANALYSES | TWO-WAY MIXED

ANOVA | INTERACTION

0,00 0,50 1,00 1,50 2,00 2,50 3,00 3,50 4,00 4,50 5,00 Vice Virtue Anticipated guilt Product Category

(10)

RESULTS

(11)

RESULTS

(12)

DISCUSSION

• FOP serving size labels with Facts Up Front design possibly still too complex

(e.g., Roberto & Khandpur, 2014)

• Anticipated guilt negatively influences purchase intention (Antonetti & Baines,

2015; Chitturi, Raghunathan & Mahajan, 2007; Birkimer, Johnston & Berry, 1993)

• The strength of health consciousness positively affects anticipated guilt when

assessing (un-)desired events (Pelletier, Dion, Slovinec & Reid, 1997;

Michaelidou & Hassan, 2008; Onwezen, Bartels & Antonides, 2014)

• Vices cause more guilt than virtues, as consumers anticipate guilt when

considering unhealthy consumption (Rozin, Fischler, Imada, Sarubin &

Wrzeniewski, 1999; Chitturi et al., 2007)

(13)

FOLLOW-UP ANALYSES

• Moderated mediation

• Dietary restriction à Vegetarianism influences

purchase intention (e.g., Lindeman & Vaananen,

2000; Orlich et al., 2014)

• Gender à Females experience more guilt in

response to food than males (e.g., Rolls, Fedoroff &

Guthrie, 1991; Narchi, Walrand, Boirie & Rousset,

2008

• Diet à Being on a diet involves avoiding risky

health behaviors, which impacts anticipated guilt

(e.g., Birkimer et al., 1993; Pelletier et al., 1997)

• Hunger à Associated with perceived overeating

and unsuccessful dieting, influencing formation of

• Two-way mixed ANOVA

• Between-subjects effects

• Same effects as before of hunger, diet and

gender

• Within-subjects effects

• Diet à Influences the effect of product category,

as diet implies a health goal, associated with

virtues instead of pleasurable vices (Van Doorn &

Verhoef, 2011; Raghunathan, Naylor & Hoyer,

2006; McCory, Fuss, Saltzman & Roberts, 2000)

• Gender à Affects the impact of product

category, since females tend to have greater

interest in healthy food than males (Rolls,

Fedoroff & Guthrie, 1991; Fagerli & Wandel, 1999)

(14)

DISCUSSION

Implications

• Persisting problem of consumers lacking nutritional knowledge

• Compulsory courses on nutrition in high schools or corporations

• Role of anticipated guilt in a consumption context

• Public policy interventions should appeal to anticipated guilt

• Marketing strategies should be designed to reduce anticipated guilt

• Effects of health consciousness, diet and hunger

• Require further investigation

• Effects of product category, and role of diet and gender in this effect

(15)

DISCUSSION

Limitations

• Self-selection of participation

• Persons interested in nutrition possibly more likely to participate

• Explicitly asking to rate anticipated guilt and purchase intention

• Reveal study’s purpose

• Activation of guilt may appeal respondents to committing associated behaviors

• Mainly Dutch sample

• Threatens generalizability when extended to other populations

• Only calorie information in FOP serving size labels are examined

(16)

DISCUSSION

Future research

• Role of anticipated guilt in a consumption context

• Other affective responses

• Role product category and health consciousness in a consumption

context

(17)

DISCUSSION

Conclusion

• Anticipated guilt important for consumers’ purchase intention

• Effect of health consciousness and product category on anticipated guilt

• Interesting to investigate, as anticipated guilt affects purchase intention

(18)

REFERENCES

Antonetti, P. & Baines, P. 2015. Guilt in Marketing Research: An Elicitation-Consumption Perspective and Research Agenda. International Journal of

Management Reviews, 17: 333 - 355.

Birkimer, J.C., Johnston, P.L. & Berry, M.M. 1993. Guilt and help from friends: Variables related to healthy behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology, 135(5): 683 – 692.

Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R. & Mahajan, V. 2007. Form versus function: how the intensities of specific emotions evoked in functional versus hedonic trade-offs mediate product preferences. Journal of Marketing Research, 44: 702 - 714.

Fagerli, R.A. & Wandel, M. 1999. Gender differences in opinions and practices with regard to a ‘healthy diet’. Appetite, 32: 171 – 190. Lindeman, M. & Vaananen, M. 2000. Measurement of ethical food choice motives. Appetite, 34: 55 – 59.

McCrory, M.A., Fuss, P.J., Saltzman, E. & Roberts, S.B. 2000. Dietary Determinants of Energy Intake and Weight Regulation in Healthy Adults. Journal of Nutrition, 130(1): 276 - 279.

Michaelidou, N. & Hassan, L.M. 2008. The role of health consciousness, food safety concern and ethical identity on attitudes and intentions towards organic food.

International Journal of Consumer Studies, 32(2): 163 – 170.

Narchi, I., Walrand, S., Boirie, Y. & Rousset S. 2008. Emotions generated by food in elderly French people. Journal of Nutrition Health and Aging, 12: 626 – 633. Onwezen, M.C., Bartels, J. & Antonides, G. 2014. The self-regulatory function of anticipated pride and guilt in a sustainable and healthy consumption context.

European Journal of Social Psychology, 44: 54 – 68.

Orlich, M. Siegl, K., Sabaté, J., Fan, J., Singh, P. & Fraser, G. 2014. Patterns of food consumption among vegetarians and non-vegetarians. The British Journal of

(19)

REFERENCES

Raghunathan, R., Naylor, R.W. & Hoyer, W.D. 2006. The unhealthy = tasty intuition and its effects on taste inferences, enjoyment, and choice of food products.

Journal of Marketing, 70(4): 170 – 184.

Roberto, C.A. & Khandpur, N. 2013. Improving the design of nutrition labels to promote healthier food choices and reasonable portion sizes. International

Journal of Obesity, 38: 525 – 533.

Rolls, B. J., Fedoroff, I. C. & Guthrie J. F. 1991. Gender differences in eating behavior and body weight regulation. Health Psychology, 10: 133 – 142.

Rozin, P., Fischler, C., Imada, S., Sarubin, A. & Wrzeniewski, A. 1999. Attitudes to Food and the Role of Food in Life in the U.S.A., Japan, Flemish Belgium and France: Possible Implications for the Diet-Health Debate. Appetite, 22: 163 – 180.

Pelletier, L.G., Dion, S.C., Slovinec-D’Angelo, M. & Reid, R. 2004. Why Do You Regulate What You Eat? Relationships Between Forms of Regulation, Eating Behaviors, Sustained Dietary Behavior Change, and Psychological Adjustment. Motivation and Emotion, 28(3): 245 - 277.

Van Doorn, J. & Verhoef, P.C. 2011. Willingness to pay for organic products: Differences between virtue and vice foods. International Journal of Research in

Marketing, 28(3): 167 - 180.

Velarde, C., Moore, A., Boakye, E., Parkhurst, T. & Brewer, D. 2018. Consumption and emotions among college students toward choclate product. Cogent Food &

Agriculture, 4(1): 1 – 10.