About AMA

Executive Summary
Using a priming procedure, the authors studied the influence of associating low-fat snack products with contextual health references (e.g., words such as "diet" and "fiber") on the consumption of these low-fat snack products. Marketers present these low-fat snack products as better for consumers' weight and health than regular snack products, and therefore such products seem to offer the perfect "solution" for dieters because they claim to offer the pleasure of regular snack foods with fewer costs (i.e., lower calories, lower fat). This study of the effects of health references on the consumption pattern of low-fat products is timely because the World Health Organization has encouraged public policies to promote the availability and accessibility of various low-fat, high-fiber foods to help remedy the obesity problem. However, recent research shows that low-fat nutrition claims (i.e., explicit claims) can increase food intake, which may severely attenuate the fat-intake reduction that results from the consumption of low-fat snacks. This finding is remarkable in light of the expectation that low-fat foods will help reduce the obesity epidemic. In this research, the authors tested whether health references (not explicit) have a consumption-increasing effect for snack products that are explicitly labeled as low fat.

The authors simulated the presence versus absence of health references in the environment (e.g., pictures of fibers, grains, or slim models on products next to the target product or on in-store displays) using a priming technique. More specifically, participants were exposed to either health-related or health-neutral words by means of a language test. After this test, participants were asked to complete a comparative taste test of two different brands of low-fat chips. The results of this first experiment showed that exposure to health-related words led participants to consume more low-fat chips in the taste test than in a situation with exposure to non-health-related words.

In the second experiment, participants received the same priming task as in the first study and were then asked about their perception of their own healthiness and that of low-fat and regular chips. The results of this second experiment showed that the consumption increase following health primes cannot be explained by the perception of low-fat snack products as being more healthful. On the contrary, exposure to health primes apparently made the low-fat chips appear less healthful than without such an exposure. Indeed, exposure to health primes even made regular chips appear less healthful. A possible explanation is that the health primes highlight the health dimension of any food in the environment. Chips, which are typically believed to be an unhealthful food, regardless of whether they are low fat, are then perceived as less healthful. Thus, the consumption increase of low-fat snack food following health primes cannot be explained by a more healthful image of the low-fat snack food. Conversely, the health primes led consumers to report that they were closer to their ideal weight than a situation without health primes. In addition, exposure to health references led people to feel more satisfied with their current weight than a situation without health primes. Consequently, consumers feel that they can devote less effort to their diets than in situations that lack health primes, which could explain the consumption increase of low-fat snacks following health primes found in the first experiment.

For marketers, the results might sound like good news in the short run, given the recent boom in the demand and supply of low-fat and other "light" products. By associating these products with implicit or incidental health references, marketers might increase sales and profit. For society in the longer run, however, the data imply that the promotion of low-fat snack foods may be a counterproductive strategy to halt the obesity epidemic because of the increased presence of health references in the environment. Although low-fat snack products are better for health than their regular counterparts, their associations with health references that happen to be present in the direct environment (e.g., pictures of fibers, grains, or slim models on products next to the target product or on in-store displays) might counteract the intended caloric reduction by embellishing consumers' self-perceptions. These health references appear to make consumers report that they are closer to their ideal weight and, consequently, could lead them to consume more of low-fat snack products.

From a policy standpoint, these findings deserve further attention because existing policy primarily regulates only the provision of nutrition information and explicit health claims, some of which promise health enhancement or reduction in the risk of disease (e.g. "proven to reduce cholesterol," "It does your heart good"), but far less attention has been paid to the use of seemingly incidental health references, which merely (indirectly or implicitly) refer to health (e.g., associations with a healthful lifestyle, "forest air," or pictures of pristine landscapes that are embedded in the purchase or consumption environment).

Some researchers have suggested that interventions to reduce fat intake should target increased liking for low-fat foods, along with increasing the proportion of low-fat food in the household. The results of the current study imply that these interventions should be carefully considered to prevent consumers from perceiving themselves as closer to their ideal weight than they really are. Moreover, the results imply that health references should affect the consumption of vice products as well. Because health references lead consumers to report that they are closer to their ideal weight, this should also result in increased consumption of regular snacks. Furthermore, because the effects seem to operate through changes in self-perception rather than in product perception, health references on low-fat products may even increase consumption of other threatening foods without claims. This would have serious implications for public policy and consumer welfare

Biography
Kelly Geyskens obtained an undergraduate degree in Applied Economics (July 2002) from K.U.Leuven and a PhD in Applied Economics, also from K.U.Leuven (October 2006). Since October 2006, she has been an assistant professor in the Department of Business Studies at the Lessius Hogeschool and Affiliate Researcher at K.U.Leuven in the Department of Marketing and Organization. She conducts research on the influence of environmental factors on consumer behavior (especially food consumption). In particular, she explores how environmental factors can lead to self-control failure and how this self-control failure can be overcome.

Mario Pandelaere obtained an MA in Applied Economics, an MSc in Statistics, a BA in Philosophy, and a PhD in Psychology, all from K.U.Leuven. Currently, he is an assistant professor in the School for Mass Communication Research at K.U.Leuven. His main research interests include persuasive communication, advertising, consumer behavior, and social psychology of communication. His recent representative publications have appeared in Journal of Economic Psychology, Psychological Science, Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, and Advances in Consumer Research.

Siegfried Dewitte received his PhD in Psychology from K.U.Leuven and has been Assistant Professor of Marketing since 2001 at K.U.Leuven. He conducts research on willpower in consumer choice (e.g., regulation in the consumption of food and cigarettes), evolutionary origins of economic behavior, social decision making, and market research techniques. He cooperates with a marketing research company (Rogil). Some recent publications have appeared in Journal of Consumer Research, Psychological Science, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Journal of Research in Personality, and Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

Luk Warlop is Professor of Marketing at K.U.Leuven. He received his PhD in Marketing from the University of Florida (1990–1995) and his MBA from K.U.Leuven (1986–1988). He was also a research assistant in the Marketing Group at K.U.Leuven (1988–1990) and received his Lic. Psychology from K.U.Leuven (1981–1986). His area of marketing expertise and interest is consumer behavior, with an emphasis on issues relevant to social marketing. His recent publication have appeared in Journal of Consumer Research, Psychological Science, International Journal of Research in Marketing, and Journal of Management Accounting Research.He received best-paper awards from International Journal of Marketing (1999) and Journal of Management Accounting Research (2003–2005). His current research focuses on self-control issues regarding food consumption, inconspicuously promoting prosocial behavior, visual attention effects in consumer choice and advertising. 

Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, Vol. 26, No. 2, Fall 2007
View Table of Contents