Exploring the main and moderating effects of individual-level characteristics on consumer responses to sugar taxes and front-of-pack nutrition labels in an experimental marketplace

Understanding Whether Price Tag Messaging Can Amplify the Benefits of Taxes: An Online Experiment

INTRODUCTION

Excise taxes on unhealthy products like sugary drinks and tobacco can reduce purchases of these products. However, little research has investigated whether messages at the point of purchase, such as enhanced price tags, can increase the effects of taxes by heightening psychological reactions. This study aimed to examine whether including messages about taxes on price tags could amplify the benefits of excise taxes on unhealthy products.

METHODS

In 2022, an online study recruited 1,013 U.S. parents to view seven price tag messages (e.g., "includes a 19% sugary drink tax") and a control (i.e., standard price tag with the tax included in the price) displayed in random order alongside sugary drinks. Participants were randomly assigned to view a caution-symbol icon or no icon on price tags. Analyses were conducted in 2023.

RESULTS

All seven messages discouraged parents from buying sugary drinks for their children compared to control (average differential effects [ADEs] ranged from 0.28 to 0.48, all p<0.001). All messages led to greater attention to the price tag (ADEs ranged from 0.24 to 0.41, all p<0.001) and greater consideration of the cost of sugary drinks (ADEs ranged from 0.31 to 0.50, all p<0.001). Icons elicited higher cost consideration than text-only price tags (ADE=0.15, p<0.010), but not discouragement (p=0.061) or attention (p=0.079).

CONCLUSIONS

Messaging on price tags could make excise taxes more effective. Policymakers should consider requiring messaging on price tags when implementing taxes.

Effects of 4 Interpretive Front-of-Package Labeling Systems on Hypothetical Beverage and Snack Selections: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Policymakers and researchers have proposed a variety of interpretative front-of-package food labeling systems, but it remains unclear which is most effective at encouraging people to choose healthier foods and beverages, including among people with less education.

Objective

To test the effects of 4 interpretative front-of-package food labeling systems on the healthfulness of beverage and snack selections, overall and by education level.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized clinical trial of a national sample of US adults 18 years and older was conducted online from November 16 to December 3, 2022.

Intervention

Participants were randomized to view products with 1 of 5 food labeling systems, including control (calorie labels only) or 1 of 4 interpretative labeling systems: green ("choose often") labels added to healthy foods; single traffic light labels added to healthy, moderately healthy, and unhealthy foods; physical activity calorie equivalent labels added to all products; and nutrient warning labels added to products high in calories, sugar, saturated fat, or sodium. All conditions had calorie labels on all products.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Participants selected 1 of 16 beverages and 1 of 16 snacks that they wanted to hypothetically purchase. The primary outcomes were calories selected from beverages and from snacks. Secondary outcomes included label reactions and perceptions.

Results

A total of 7945 participants completed the experiment and were included in analyses (4078 [51%] female, 3779 [48%] male, and 88 [1%] nonbinary or another gender; mean [SD] age, 47.5 [17.9 years]). Compared with the control arm, exposure to the green (average differential effect [ADE], -34.2; 95% CI, -42.2 to -26.1), traffic light (ADE, -31.5; 95% CI, -39.5 to -23.4), physical activity (ADE, -39.0; 95% CI, -47.0 to -31.1), or nutrient warning labels (ADE, -28.2; 95% CI, -36.2 to -20.2) led participants to select fewer calories from beverages (all P < .001). Similarly, compared with the control label, exposure to the green (ADE, -12.7; 95% CI, -17.3 to -8.2), traffic light (ADE, -13.7; 95% CI, -18.2 to -9.1), physical activity (ADE, -18.5; 95% CI, -23.1 to -13.9), or nutrient warning labels (ADE, -14.2; 95% CI, -18.8 to -9.6) led participants to select fewer calories from snacks (all P < .001). These effects did not differ by education level. The green labels were rated as less stigmatizing than the other interpretative systems but otherwise generally received the least favorable label reactions and perceptions (eg, elicited less attention, were perceived as less trustworthy), while the nutrient warnings and physical activity labels received the most favorable ratings.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial of front-of-package food labeling systems, all 4 interpretative labeling systems reduced calories selected from beverages and from snacks compared with calorie labels, with no differences by education level.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05432271.

Modelling the health and economic impact of sugary sweetened beverage tax in Canada

Background

With the increasing concerns about the health and economic burden attributed to sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) consumption, SSB taxation has been proposed and implemented in many countries. Many previous economic evaluations of SSB taxation have shown that this kind of policy is cost-effective. However, the magnitude of impact varies. This study aims to design a comprehensive model to estimate the impact and cost-effectiveness of the SSB tax in Canada.

Methods

A proportional multi-state life table-based Markov model was chosen to estimate the impacts of SSB tax in Canada. The health-related quality of life (including disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)), the costs (including health care costs and intervention costs), and the tax revenue were the main health and economic outcomes. We compared the simulated SSB tax with the current practice from the public health care payer perspective, and the tax was applied to the 2015 adult Canadian population up to 100 years. The economic model was built following guidelines from the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health.

Results

After implementing a CAD$0.015/oz SSB tax, 282,104 cases of overweight and obesity, 210,542 cases of diseases, and 2,189 deaths could be prevented. The simulated SSB tax has the potential to avert 2.3 million DALYs, gain 1.5 million QALYs, and save CAD$32,583 million in health care costs in a lifetime period. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the SSB tax was CAD$ -24,933/QALY. The SSB tax with different tax levels (CAD$0.01/oz and CAD$0.02/oz) remained cost-effective.

Conclusion

Implementing the SSB tax in Canada is a potential cost-effective policy option for reducing obesity and related chronic diseases. The model built in this study provides a more accurate estimate of health and economic impact of SSB tax and could be used to estimate other sugar tax options.

Do sugar warning labels influence parents' selection of a labeled snack for their children? A randomized trial in a virtual convenience store

Despite growing evidence that warning labels reduce purchases of sugary drinks, less is known about warnings' impact on purchases of sugary snacks. This paper aimed to experimentally test whether a front-of-package label warning about high sugar content ("sugar warning label") would reduce parents' likelihood of selecting a labeled snack versus a non-labeled snack for their child in a food store setting. Participants (n = 2,219 parents of at least one child aged 1-5y) were recruited via an online panel and asked to complete a shopping task in a virtual convenience store. Participants were randomized to one of three labeling conditions: barcode control, text-only sugar warning label, or pictorial sugar warning label. Participants viewed two granola snacks, one labeled and one unlabeled, and selected one for purchase. A post-shopping survey measured secondary outcomes. Predictions and analyses were preregistered on www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04381481). Participants exposed to the text or pictorial sugar warning labels were less likely to select the labeled snack than those in the barcode control group (21%, 18%, and 34% respectively; p < 0.001 for both comparisons of warning to control). Relative to the barcode control label, the text and pictorial sugar warning labels resulted in greater attention, anticipated social interactions, negative affect, cognitive elaboration, and perceived message effectiveness, as well as lower perceptions of healthfulness, appeal, and intentions to purchase or consume the product (p < 0.001 for all comparisons of warnings to control). There were no differences in outcomes between text and pictorial sugar warning labels. In conclusion, text and pictorial sugar warning labels reduced parents' likelihood of selecting a labeled granola snack for their children. These results contribute to a growing body of evidence showing that warning labels influence food purchasing behaviors.

Influence of the San Francisco, CA, Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Health Warning on Consumer Reactions: Implications for Equity from a Randomized Experiment

BACKGROUND

In 2020, San Francisco, CA, amended an ordinance requiring warning labels on advertisements for sugary drinks to update the warning message. No studies have evaluated consumer responses to the revised message.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate responses to the 2020 San Francisco sugary drink warning label and to assess whether these responses differ by demographic characteristics.

DESIGN

Randomized experiment.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

During 2020, a convenience sample of US parents of children aged 6 months to 5 years (N = 2,160 included in primary analyses) was recruited via an online panel to complete a survey. Oversampling was used to achieve a diverse sample (49% Hispanic/Latino[a], 34% non-Hispanic Black, and 9% non-Hispanic White).

METHODS

Participants were randomly assigned to view a control label ("Always read the Nutrition Facts Panel") or the 2020 San Francisco sugary drink warning label ("SAN FRANCISCO GOVERNMENT WARNING: Drinking beverages with added sugar(s) can cause weight gain, which increases the risk of obesity and type 2 diabetes."). Messages were shown in white text on black rectangular labels.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Participants rated the labels on thinking about health harms of sugary drink consumption (primary outcome) and perceived discouragement from wanting to consume sugary drinks. The survey was available in English and Spanish.

STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED

Ordinary least squares regression.

RESULTS

The San Francisco warning label elicited more thinking about health harms (Cohen's d = 0.24; P < 0.001) than the control label. The San Francisco warning label also led to more discouragement from wanting to consume sugary drinks than the control label (d = 0.31; P < 0.001). The warning label's influence on thinking about harms did not differ by any participant characteristics, including age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, income, or language of survey administration (all P values for interactions > 0.12).

CONCLUSIONS

San Francisco's 2020 sugary drink warning label may be a promising policy for informing consumers and encouraging healthier beverage choices across groups with diverse demographic characteristics.

The impact of pictorial health warnings on purchases of sugary drinks for children: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Pictorial warnings on tobacco products are promising for motivating behavior change, but few studies have examined pictorial warnings for sugary drinks, especially in naturalistic environments. This study aimed to examine the impact of pictorial warnings on parents' purchases of sugary drinks for their children in a naturalistic store laboratory.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Parents of children ages 2 to 12 (n = 325, 25% identifying as Black, 20% Hispanic) completed a shopping task in a naturalistic store laboratory in North Carolina. Participants were randomly assigned to a pictorial warnings arm (sugary drinks displayed pictorial health warnings about type 2 diabetes and heart damage) or a control arm (sugary drinks displayed a barcode label). Parents selected 1 beverage and 1 snack for their child, as well as 1 household good; one of these items was selected for them to purchase and take home. The primary outcome was whether parents purchased a sugary drink for their child. Secondary outcomes included reactions to the trial labels, attitudes toward sugary drinks, and intentions to serve their child sugary drinks. Pictorial warnings led to a 17-percentage point reduction in purchases of sugary drinks (95% CI for reduction: 7% to 27%), with 45% of parents in the control arm buying a sugary drink for their child compared to 28% in the pictorial warning arm (p = 0.002). The impact of pictorial warnings on purchases did not differ by any of the 13 participant characteristics examined (e.g., race/ethnicity, income, education, and age of child). Pictorial warnings also led to lower calories (kcal), purchased from sugary drinks (82 kcal in the control arm versus 52 kcal in the pictorial warnings arm, p = 0.003). Moreover, pictorial warnings led to lower intentions to serve sugary drinks to their child, feeling more in control of healthy eating decisions, greater thinking about the harms of sugary drinks, stronger negative emotional reactions, greater anticipated social interactions, lower perceived healthfulness of sugary drinks for their child, and greater injunctive norms to limit sugary drinks for their child (all p < 0.05). There was no evidence of difference between trial arms on noticing of the labels, appeal of sugary drinks, perceived amount of added sugar in sugary drinks, risk perceptions, or perceived tastiness of sugary drinks (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Pictorial warnings reduced parents' purchases of sugary drinks for their children in this naturalistic trial. Warnings on sugary drinks are a promising policy approach to reduce sugary drink purchasing in the US.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial design, measures, power calculation, and analytic plan were registered before data collection at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT04223687.