Facts-Up-Front Versus Traffic-Light Food Labels
1 other identifier
interventional
703
1 country
1
Brief Summary
The U.S. food and beverage industry recently released a new front-of-package nutrition labeling system called Facts Up Front that will be used on thousands of food products. The purpose of this study was to test consumer understanding of the Facts Up Front nutrition labeling system compared to the Multiple Traffic Light system (Traffic Light). Facts Up Front displays grams/milligrams and % daily value information for various nutrients; Traffic Light uses an interpretive color-coded scheme to alert consumers to low, medium or high levels of certain nutrients. Participants in an Internet-based study were randomized to one of five front-of-package label conditions: 1) No Label; 2) Traffic Light; 3) Traffic Light plus information about protein and fiber (Traffic Light+); 4) Facts Up Front; or 5) Facts Up Front plus information about "nutrients to encourage" (Facts Up Front+). Total percentage correct quiz scores were generated reflecting participants' ability to compare two foods on nutrient levels, based on their labels, and to estimate amounts of saturated fat, sugar, sodium, fiber and protein in foods. 703 adult participants recruited through an online database in May 2011 participated in this Internet-based study and data were analyzed in June 2011. The investigators hypothesized that the Traffic Light label groups would perform better than the Facts Up Front groups on all outcomes.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for not_applicable
Started May 2011
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
May 1, 2011
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
May 1, 2011
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
May 1, 2011
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
June 14, 2012
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
June 25, 2012
CompletedJune 25, 2012
June 1, 2012
Same day
June 14, 2012
June 20, 2012
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (2)
Nutrient Comparison and Nutrient Level Estimation Accuracy
Participants took a nutrient level comparison quiz asking them to identify which of two products presented side-by-side in the same food category were higher or lower in different nutrients. Participants also viewed 8 individual products and estimated whether the product had low, medium or high amounts of saturated fat, sugar, sodium, fiber, and protein. The primary outcomes were total percentage correct on these quizzes.
Baseline
Perceptions of Health, Taste and Purchase Intent
Participants rated how healthy they thought each individual product was, how good it would taste and their likelihood to buy the product for themselves and their children (answered only by those who reported having children) using a 9-point Likert scale. Each set of ratings was averaged across eight products.
Baseline
Secondary Outcomes (1)
Consumer Label Preferences
Baseline
Study Arms (5)
Traffic Light
EXPERIMENTALTraffic Light+
EXPERIMENTALFacts Up Front
EXPERIMENTALFacts Up Front+
EXPERIMENTALNo front of package label
PLACEBO COMPARATORInterventions
A calories per serving label and a Traffic Light symbol with High/Med/Low text indicating amounts of saturated fat, total sugars, sodium, fiber and protein per serving.
A label displaying calories, saturated fat, sodium, and total sugars per serving. The label also showed two (out of the possible eight) nutrients to encourage with the highest %DV. Nutrient amounts were listed in grams/milligrams and %DVs were included. This symbol was based directly on the Facts Up Front symbol description provided by the Grocery Manufacturers Association and Food Marketing Institute.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Participants in Survey Sampling International Panels
You may not qualify if:
- Younger than 18 years old
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
- Yale Universitylead
- Robert Wood Johnson Foundationcollaborator
Study Sites (1)
Survey Sampling International & Yale University
New Haven, Connecticut, 06520, United States
Related Publications (1)
Roberto CA, Bragg MA, Schwartz MB, Seamans MJ, Musicus A, Novak N, Brownell KD. Facts up front versus traffic light food labels: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Prev Med. 2012 Aug;43(2):134-41. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2012.04.022.
PMID: 22813677DERIVED
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Christina A Roberto, PhD
Yale University
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- PREVENTION
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Principal Investigator
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
June 14, 2012
First Posted
June 25, 2012
Study Start
May 1, 2011
Primary Completion
May 1, 2011
Study Completion
May 1, 2011
Last Updated
June 25, 2012
Record last verified: 2012-06