Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Impact of Qualified Health Claims on Advertising Evaluations: The Cases of POM Wonderful and Minute Maid

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Consumer Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recently, there has been increasing attention to and importance placed on qualified health claims both on industry and policy fronts. All parties have been advocating for broader qualified health claims to improve the information that consumers possess so that they can make more informed decisions. This research attempts to inform this discussion by examining consumer responses to qualified health claims and the scientific certainty that supports the health claim. The results of this study have important implications for consumers who are prospective buyers of these products as well as policymakers and industry members.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. All measures are included verbatim in Appendix B.

References

  • Andrews, J. C., Burton, S., & Netemeyer, R. G. (2000). Are some comparative nutrition claims misleading? The role of nutrition knowledge, ad claim type, and disclosure conditions. Journal of Advertising, 29(3), 29–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bearden, W. O., Lichtenstein, D. R., & Teel, J. E. (1984). Comparison price, coupon, and brand effects on consumer reactions to retail newspaper advertisements. Journal of Retailing, 60(Summer), 11–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berhaput-Glickstein, A., & Hallman, W. K. (2017). Communicating scientific evidence in qualified health claims. Critical Reviews in Food Science & Nutrition, 57(13), 2811–2824.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolton, L. E., Reed, A., II, Volpp, K. G., & Armstrong, K. (2008). How does drug and supplement marketing affect a healthy lifestyle? Journal of Consumer Research, 34(May), 713–726.

  • Buttrick, H. G., & Hatch, C. D. (2016). Pomegranate juice can do that? Navigating the jurisdictional landscape of food health claim regulation in a post-POM Wonderful world. Indiana Law Review, 49(2), 267–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derby, B. M., & Levy, A. S. (2005). Effects of strength of science disclaimers on the communication impacts of health claims (FDA Working Paper I). Silver Spring: U.S. Food and Drug Organization.

  • Dhar, R., & Simonson, I. (1999). Making complementary choices in consumption episodes: Highlighting versus balancing. Journal of Marketing Research, 36(1), 29–44.

  • FTC (1994). Enforcement policy statement on good advertising. Federal Trade Commission. Available at: https://www.ftc.gov/public-statements/1994/05/enforcement-policy-statement-food-advertising. Accessed 12 Feb 2019.

  • FDA (2009). Guidance for industry: Evidence-based review system for the scientific evaluation of health claims—final. U. S. Food and Drug Administration. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/food/guidanceregulation/guidancedocumentsregulatoryinformation/ucm073332.htm. . Accessed 12 Feb 2019.

  • FDA (2013). Guidance for industry: A food labeling guide. U. S. Food and Drug Administration. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/LabelingNutrition/ucm064908.htm#health. Accessed 12 Feb 2019.

  • FDA (2016). Structure/function claims. U. S. Food and Drug Administration. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/food/ingredientspackaginglabeling/labelingnutrition/ucm2006881.htm.. Accessed 12 Feb 2019.

  • France, K. R., & Bone, P. F. (2009). Conveying level of science: Tests of iconic and comparative formats. Marketing Letters, 20(4), 385–397.

  • Giombi, K. C., Muth, M. K., & Levin, D. (2018). A comparative analysis of hedonic models of nutrition information and health claims on food products: An application to soup products. Journal of Food Products Marketing, 24(7), 906–926.

  • Kaur, N., & Singh, D. P. (2017). Deciphering the consumer behaviour facets of functional foods: A literature review. Appetite, 112, 167–187.

  • Kim, T., & Pocheptsova, A. (2015, June 6). Disease cause attribution and health related judgments: A self-control view. Washington, DC: Marketing and Public Policy Conference Presentation.

  • Ludwig, D. S., & Brownell, K. D. (2009). Public health action amid scientific uncertainty: The case of restaurant calorie labeling regulations. Journal of the American Medical Association, 302(4), 434–435.

  • Moorman, C. (1990). The effects of stimulus and consumer characteristics on the utilization of nutrition information. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(3), 362–374.

  • Murphy, R. D.(2005). Consumer perceptions of qualified health claims in advertising (Federal Trade Commission Working Paper No. 227, July 2005).

  • Nestle, M. (2018, October 18). Who is suing whom? Food politics lawsuits. Food Politics Blog. Available at http://www.foodpolitics.com. Accessed 1 Dec 2018.

  • Obermiller, C., & Spangenberger, E. R. (1998). Development of a scale to measure consumer skepticism toward advertising. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7(2), 159–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co., 134 S. Ct. 2228 (2014).

  • POM Wonderful LLC v. Federal Trade Commission, 777 F. 3d 478 (D.C. Cir. 2015).

  • Shimp, T. A. (1981). Attitude towards the ad as a mediator of consumer brand choice. Journal of Advertising, 10(2), 9–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinrich, J. (2017, June 26). 6 food claims to pay attention to – and 4 to ignore. Reader’s Digest. 

  • Walker, R., Droms, C. M., & Haws, K. L. (2009). Eating with a purpose: Consumer response to functional food health claims in conflicting versus complementary information environments. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 28(2), 221–233.

  • Williams, P. (2008). Consumer understanding and use of health claims for foods. Nutrition Reviews, 63(7), 256–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winters, D. R. H. (2015). The magical thinking of food labeling: The NLEA as a failed statute. Tulane Law Review, 89, 815–867.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lacy School of Business, Butler University, 4600 Sunset Avenue, Indianapolis, IN, 46208, USA

    C. D. Hatch & H. Buttrick

Authors
  1. C. D. Hatch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. H. Buttrick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. D. Hatch.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1. Study Advertisements

figure afigure a

Appendix 2. Study Measures

Brand Familiarity:

How familiar are you with [Brand Condition]? (7-point Not Familiar – Very Familiar).

How often do you buy products from [Brand Condition]? (5-point Never – All the Time).

Ingredient Familiarity:

How familiar are you with pomegranate juice? (7-point Not Familiar – Very Familiar).

How often do you buy pomegranate juice? (5 point Never – All the Time).

Advertisement Evaluation Scale:

Please evaluate the advertisement on the following characteristics: (7-point Strongly Disagree – Strongly Agree Response Choices)

Good

Interesting

Informative

Appropriate

Easy to Understand

Objective

Distinctive

Health Claim Evaluation:

Please evaluate the health claim for pomegranate juice using the following scales: (7-point Strongly Disagree – Strongly Agree)

Believable

Trustworthy

Credible

Purchase Intentions Scale:

How likely would you be to purchase this product? (7-point Strongly Disagree – Strongly Agree)

Likely

Probable

Certain

Definite

Willing to Pay Measure:

How much would you be willing to pay for the product advertised? __________________

Carry Over Health Behavior Measures:

If you did decide to purchase and consume the advertised juice on a regular basis, how likely would you be to engage in each of the following behaviors (all of which have also been shown to improve an individual’s health)? (7-point Very Unlikely – Very Likely).

Regular exercise (at least 30 minutes 5–6 days a week).

Eating a low cholesterol diet.

Eating 5–6 servings of fruits and vegetables a day.

Regular check-ups with your doctor.

Advertising Skepticism Scale:

Please indicate your agreement or disagreement with the following statements: (5-point Strongly Disagree – Strongly Agree).

We can depend on getting the truth in most advertising.

Advertising’s aim is to inform the consumer.

I believe advertising is informative.

Advertising is generally truthful.

Advertising is a reliable source of information about the quality and performance of products.

Advertising is truth well told.

In general, advertising presents a true picture of the product being advertised.

I feel I have been accurately informed after viewing most advertisements.

Most advertising provides consumers with essential information.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hatch, C.D., Buttrick, H. The Impact of Qualified Health Claims on Advertising Evaluations: The Cases of POM Wonderful and Minute Maid. J Consum Policy 42, 285–301 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-019-09408-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-019-09408-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation