Skip to main content
×
Home

Nutrition labels: a survey of use, understanding and preferences among ethnically diverse shoppers in New Zealand

  • Delvina Gorton (a1), Cliona Ni Mhurchu (a1), Mei-hua Chen (a1) and Robyn Dixon (a2)
Abstract
AbstractObjective

Effective nutrition labels are part of a supportive environment that encourages healthier food choices. The present study examined the use, understanding and preferences regarding nutrition labels among ethnically diverse shoppers in New Zealand.

Design and setting

A survey was carried out at twenty-five supermarkets in Auckland, New Zealand, between February and April 2007. Recruitment was stratified by ethnicity. Questions assessed nutrition label use, understanding of the mandatory Nutrition Information Panel (NIP), and preference for and understanding of four nutrition label formats: multiple traffic light (MTL), simple traffic light (STL), NIP and percentage of daily intake (%DI).

Subjects

In total 1525 shoppers completed the survey: 401 Maori, 347 Pacific, 372 Asian and 395 New Zealand European and Other ethnicities (ten did not state ethnicity).

Results

Reported use of nutrition labels (always, regularly, sometimes) ranged from 66 % to 87 % by ethnicity. There was little difference in ability to obtain information from the NIP according to ethnicity or income. However, there were marked ethnic differences in ability to use the NIP to determine if a food was healthy, with lesser differences by income. Of the four label formats tested, STL and MTL labels were best understood across all ethnic and income groups, and MTL labels were most frequently preferred.

Conclusions

There are clear ethnic and income disparities in ability to use the current mandatory food labels in New Zealand (NIP) to determine if foods are healthy. Conversely, MTL and STL label formats demonstrated high levels of understanding and acceptance across ethnic and income groups.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Nutrition labels: a survey of use, understanding and preferences among ethnically diverse shoppers in New Zealand
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Nutrition labels: a survey of use, understanding and preferences among ethnically diverse shoppers in New Zealand
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Nutrition labels: a survey of use, understanding and preferences among ethnically diverse shoppers in New Zealand
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
*Corresponding author: Email d.gorton@ctru.auckland.ac.nz
References
Hide All
1.Ni Mhurchu C & Gorton D (2007) Nutrition labels and claims in New Zealand and Australia: a review of use and understanding. Aust N Z J Public Health 31, 105112.
2.Higginson CS, Rayner MJ, Draper S & Kirk TR (2002) How do consumers use nutrition label information? Nutr Food Sci 32, 145152.
3.Food Standards Australia New Zealand (2003) Food Labelling Issues: Quantitative Research With Consumers. Canberra: FSANZ.
4.Lawes C, Stefanogiannis N, Tobias M, Paki Paki N, Ni Mhurchu C, Turley M, Vander Hoorn S & Rodgers A (2006) Ethnic disparities in nutrition-related mortality in New Zealand: 1997–2011. N Z Med J 119, U2122.
5.Ministry of Health (2005) The Health of Pacific Peoples. Wellington: Ministry of Health.
6.Asian Public Health Project Team (2003) Asian Public Health Project Report. Wellington: Ministry of Health.
7.Lanumata T, Robinson J, Signal L, Tavila A & Wilton J (2006) Evaluation of the Effectiveness of ‘Pick the Tick’ as a Guide to Healthy Food Choices for Maori, Pacific and Low-income Peoples. Wellington: Department of Public Health, Wellington School of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Otago.
8.Ni Mhurchu C (2006) Nutrition Labelling: A Scientific Review of Consumer Use and Understanding of Nutrition Labels and Claims. Auckland: University of Auckland.
9.Health Committee (2007) Inquiry into Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes in New Zealand. Wellington: Health Committee.
10.Food Standards Agency (2004) Consumer Attitudes to Food Standards 2004. London: FSA.
11.Clinical Trials Research Unit (2007) Nutrition Labels: A Quantitative Survey of Understanding and Use by Ethnicity and Income in New Zealand. Auckland: University of Auckland.
12.Satia JA, Galanko JA & Neuhouser ML (2005) Food nutrition label use is associated with demographic, behavioral, and psychosocial factors and dietary intake among African Americans in North Carolina. J Am Diet Assoc 105, 392402.
13.McArthur L, Chamberlain V & Howard AB (2001) Behaviors, attitudes, and knowledge of low-income consumers regarding nutrition labels. J Health Care Poor Underserved 12, 415428.
14.Jones G & Richardson M (2007) An objective examination of consumer perception of nutrition information based on healthiness ratings and eye movements. Public Health Nutr 10, 234244.
15.Synovate (2005) Quantitative Evaluation of Alternative Food Signposting Concepts. Kent: FSA.
16.Synovate (2005) Qualitative Signpost Labelling Refinement Research. Kent: FSA.
17.Which? (2006) Healthy Signs? Campaign Report. London: Which?
18.TNS Social Research (2007) Qualitative Research into the Interpretation of %DI and %RDI Labelling. Canberra: FSANZ.
19.Food Standards Agency (2006) Food Labelling Requirements: Qualitative Research. London: FSA.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Public Health Nutrition
  • ISSN: 1368-9800
  • EISSN: 1475-2727
  • URL: /core/journals/public-health-nutrition
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 40
Total number of PDF views: 372 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 461 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 22nd November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.