Decoding the Interplay of Front-of-Pack Labels, Price, and Consumer Perceptions: Impact on Food Choices in Korea and Singapore

NCT07186270 | Not Yet Recruiting

• 1 other identifier: 000273
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 1,000
• Locations: 0 countries
• Sites: N/A

Brief Summary

The global epidemic of obesity and chronic diseases has led to widespread use of front-of-package (FOP) nutrition labels. While existing research has established a link between FOP labels and consumer choices, the interplay between product types, consumer perceptions, and label effectiveness is underexplored. This study examines: 1) whether consumers perceive healthier food item as more expensive when healthiness is less obvious; 2) how FOP labels mediate the relationship among product characteristics, price, and consumer's belief about food healthiness and price on choices; and 3) whether food choice changes given a price, with and without FOP labels, are more prominent for products where the perceived healthiness by consumers significantly differs from label indications. The investigators will conduct experiments with online panelists in Korea and Singapore in two settings: restaurant menus and grocery items. Results will inform more impactful nutritional information policies for healthier food choices and improved population health.

Conditions

Consumer Behavior

Keywords

Front-of-pack labelling

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Consumers behavior

  Study 1: Participants achieve a response by choosing between two menu food items they would purchase for their co-worker in online experimental platform. Study 2: Participants rate their intention to purchase grocery items on a 7-point scale (1 = least likely, 7 = most likely) in online experimental platform.

  Participants are expected to complete the online experiment in one sitting (within 24 hours). If they are disconnected from the survey platform, they are allowed up to two attempts to resume, with access to the platform disabled after 48 hours.

Study Arms (2)

Study 1: Restaurant menu choice experiment

EXPERIMENTAL

Participants will read a hypothetical scenario about ordering a meal for a coworker. Participants will be told that their coworker has no dietary restrictions and is trying to eat healthier. They will be presented with two similar restaurant meal options, one priced higher than the other, with randomized assignments. In the label condition, a nutritional label for healthy foods, called the Healthy Choice Symbol adopted in Singapore, will be provided with an explanation of the labelling system. For both label and non-label conditions, participants will be asked to assess the healthfulness of each option using a standard 5-point scale (1-least healthy to 5-healthiest). Participants will then be asked to indicate which option to order for their coworker. Participants will be randomly assigned to one in four experimental arms.

Behavioral: Positively framed FOP labels (present versus absent) x Price (high versus low)

Study 2: Grocery Food Item Choice Experiment

EXPERIMENTAL

Participants will read a hypothetical cover story about a new brand of a grocery item with generic health claims and see pictures of different flavors of this brand. Participants will be randomly assigned to either an average or a premium price condition and informed about the average price of other brands of the same item. They will be asked to indicate their perceived relative healthiness of the product compared to the products in other brands on a 5-point scale (1- least healthy to 5- healthiest). After assessment, they will see a high-grade label (grade A), low-grade label (grade D), or no label. For those exposed to labels, they will be given an explanation of the label and asked to indicate their perceived relative healthiness of the product again. In the end, all participants will indicate their intention to purchase items on a 7-point scale (1: least likely - 7: most likely). Participants will be assigned to one in six experimental arms.

Behavioral: Graded FOP labels (no label vs. high rating (grade A) vs. low rating (grade D)) x Price (average vs. premium)

Interventions

Positively framed FOP labels (present versus absent) x Price (high versus low) BEHAVIORAL

The intervention combines either a front-of-pack (FOP) label that frames high nutrition or no FOP label with price variation. Products are randomly assigned to either receive a positively-framed FOP label or no label, and to either a high or a low price. This yields four experimental arms: 1. Positively framed FOP label with high price 2. Positively framed FOP label with low price 3. No label with high price 4. No label with low price

Study 1: Restaurant menu choice experiment

Graded FOP labels (no label vs. high rating (grade A) vs. low rating (grade D)) x Price (average vs. premium) BEHAVIORAL

The intervention combines either a graded front-of-pack (FOP) labelling or no FOP labelling with price variation. Products are randomly assigned to either receive a graded label or no label, and to either a premium or an average price. This yields six experimental arms: 1. High grade (A) with premium price 2. Low grade (D) with premium price 3. No label with premium price 4. High grade (A) with average price 5. Low grade (D) with average price 6. No label with average price

Study 2: Grocery Food Item Choice Experiment

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: Up to 65 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Child (0-17), Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• Adults aged 18-65 years residing in Korea
• Adults aged 21-65 years residing in Singapore

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School: lead
• Korea University: collaborator
• National University of Singapore: collaborator

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Consumer Behavior

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Behavior

Study Officials

• Sang Hyeon Lee

  Korea University

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

• Soye Shin

  Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Central Study Contacts

Soye Shin

CONTACT

+6566013319; syshin@duke-nus.edu.sg

Linh Nguyen

CONTACT

+6590786645; linhng@nus.edu.sg

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: NONE
• Purpose: HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH
• Intervention Model: SEQUENTIAL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Assistant Professor

Model Details: At baseline, participants rate 8 menu items and 8 grocery items on a 5-point healthiness scale (1= least healthy, 5= healthiest) and their confidence. 6 menu items and 6 grocery items will be selected for experiment in study 1 and 2 respectively, prioritizing items with the largest perceived-actual healthiness gap, while ensuring varied confidence levels among items with similar gaps. Study 1: Participants read a hypothetical scenario about ordering meal for a co-worker. They will be randomized to 1 of the 4 conditions and asked to choose a menu item to order for their coworker. Study 2: Participants read a hypothetical cover story about a new brand Y of grocery item W and see pictures of different flavors with general health claim. They will be randomized to 1 of the 6 conditions. Participants indicate their likelihood of buying Brand Y in the hypothetical situation that they intend to purchase item W. Details of experiments in each study are discussed in the next section.

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: September 11, 2025
• First Posted: September 22, 2025
• Study Start: October 1, 2025
• Primary Completion: December 1, 2025
• Study Completion: December 1, 2025
• Last Updated: September 23, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-09