Many nutrition and/or health symbols were introduced in different countries in the past years and Slovenia is no exception. The objective of our study was to examine familiarity with and perception of the Protective Food symbol (PF symbol) in Slovenia and to investigate consumers' associations related to the symbol, and the influence of symbols' appearance on their preferences. The study was conducted through online questionnaire with incorporated word-association tasks and conjoint analysis; GfK consumer panel and social media (Facebook) were used for recruitment of Slovenian adults (n = 1050; 534 men, 516 women). The majority (78%) of the participants reported they had previously seen the PF symbol, and 64% declared familiarity with it. Familiarity was verified using a word-association task in which we analysed the nature of the symbol's description, distinguishing the description of symbol's visual appearance or its meaning. In this task, 73% of the participants described the symbol's meaning with reference to health or a healthy lifestyle, confirming their familiarity with it. Women and those responsible for grocery shopping were significantly more familiar with the symbol. The impact of the symbol's appearance on consumers' preferences was investigated using conjoint analysis consisting of two attributes – three different symbols found on foods in Slovenia (PF symbol, Choices Programme symbol and Keyhole symbol), and accompanying worded claims. Although worded claims had less relative importance (29.5%) than the symbols (70.5%), we show that careful choice of the wording can affect consumers' preferences considerably. The lowest part-worth utility was observed without an accompanying claim, and the highest for the claim directly communicating health (“Protects your health”). The fact that most participants are well familiar with the PF symbol indicates the symbol's potential to promote healthier food choices, which could be further improved by an accompanying worded claim that clearly describes its meaning. In addition, the use of Facebook ads is shown to be a useful alternative recruitment method for research with consumers.
COBISS.SI-ID: 3824264
BACKGROUNG/OBJECTIVES: Compares the nutritional quality of pre-packaged foods carrying health-related claims with foods that do not carry health-related claims. SUBJECT/METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of pre-packaged foods available in Germany, The Netherlands, Spain, Slovenia and the United Kingdom in 2013. A total of 2034 foods were randomly sampled from three food store types (a supermarket, a neighbourhood store and a discounter). Nutritional information was taken from nutrient declarations present on food labels and assessed through a comparison of mean levels, regression analyses and the application of a nutrient profile model currently used to regulate health claims in Australia and New Zealand (Food Standards Australia New Zealand's Nutrient Profiling Scoring Criterion, FSANZ NPSC). RESULTS: Foods carrying health claims had, on average, lower levels, per 100 g, of the following nutrients, energy-29.3 kcal (P(0.05), protein-1.2 g (P(0.01), total sugars-3.1 g (P(0.05), saturated fat-2.4 g (P(0.001), and sodium-842 mg (P(0.001), and higher levels of fibre-0.8 g (P(0.001). A similar pattern was observed for foods carrying nutrition claims. Fortythree percent (confidence interval (CI) 41%, 45%) of foods passed the FSANZ NPSC, with foods carrying health claims more likely to pass (70%, CI 64%, 76%) than foods carrying nutrition claims (61%, CI 57%, 66%) or foods that did not carry either type of claim (36%, CI 34%, 38%). CONCLUSIONS: Foods carrying health-related claims have marginally better nutrition profiles than those that do not carry claims; these differences would be increased if the FSANZ NPSC was used to regulate health-related claims. It is unclear whether these relatively small differences have significant impacts on health.
COBISS.SI-ID: 38761989