Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science

, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp 240–256 | Cite as

Broken halos and shattered horns: overcoming the biasing effects of prior expectations through objective information disclosure

  • Scot Burton
  • Laurel Aynne Cook
  • Elizabeth Howlett
  • Christopher L. Newman
Original Empirical Research

Abstract

In three studies the authors seek to extend prior research by examining the simultaneous effects of positive (halos) and negative (horns) health-related inferences. How the provision of objective point-of-purchase nutrition information moderates the effects of these pre-existing health halo and health horn effects on food evaluations and choices is considered. In Study 1 predictions addressing the interaction between a recently mandated objective nutrition disclosure and initial product category healthfulness perceptions are proposed and supported. Study 2 extends findings from this initial online experiment to a more realistic retail environment, and Study 3 addresses how different presentation exposure contexts (on a package compared to a nutrition poster) affects evaluations and how evaluations related to the information disclosure are linked. Since the USDA recently required retailers to provide nutrition information at the point-of-purchase for beef and poultry products, these results have important implications for consumers, producers, retailers, and policy makers.

Keywords

Health halos Consumer expectations Heuristic-systematic processing Retail food choices Retail product labeling Consumer inferences Product disclosure 

References

  1. Anderson, J. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Andrews, J. C., Netemeyer, R. G., & Burton, S. (1998). Consumer generalization of nutrient content claims in advertising. Journal of Marketing, 62, 62–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balasubramanian, S., & Cole, C. (2002). Consumers search and use of nutrition information: the challenge and the promise of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act. Journal of Marketing, 66, 112–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baltas, G., & Doyle, P. (2001). Random utility models in marketing research: a survey. Journal of Business Research, 51, 115–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, C., Finkenauser, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5, 323–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Block, L. G., & Peracchio, L. A. (2006). The calcium quandary: how consumers use nutrition labels. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 25, 188–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: a new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burton, S., Garretson, J. A., & Velliquette, A. M. (1999). Implications of accurate usage of nutrition facts panel and information for food product evaluations and purchase intentions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27, 470–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 752–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Heuristic and systematic information processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 212–252). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  11. Chandon, P., & Wansink, B. (2007). The biasing health halos of fast-food restaurant health claims: lower calorie estimates and higher side-dish consumption intentions. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Churchill, G. A., Jr., & Surprenant, C. (1982). An investigation into the determinants of customer satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 491–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cole, C., & Gaeth, G. J. (1990). Cognitive and age-related differences in the ability to use nutritional information in a complex environment. Journal of Marketing Research, 27, 175–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Daniel, C. R., Cross, A. J., Koebnick, C., & Sinha, R. (2011). Trends in meat consumption in the United States. Public Health Nutrition, 14, 575–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Darke, P., Ashworth, L., & Main, K. (2010). Great expectations and broken promises: misleading claims, product failure, expectancy disconfirmation and consumer distrust. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38, 347–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Federal Register. (2010). Nutrition labeling of single-ingredient products and ground or chopped meat and poultry products: Final rule. 75, 82148–82167.Google Scholar
  17. Glanz, K., Basil, M., Maiback, E., Goldberg, J., & Snyder, D. (1998). Why Americans eat what they do: taste, nutrition, cost, convenience, and weight control as influences on food consumption. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 98, 1118–1126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Green, K., & Armstrong, J. (2012). Evidence on the effects of mandatory disclaimers in advertising. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 31, 293–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  20. Howlett, E., Burton, S., & Kozup, J. (2008). How modification of the nutrition facts panel influences consumers at risk for heart disease: the case of trans fat. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 27, 83–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Howlett, E., Burton, S., Bates, K., & Huggins, K. (2009). Coming to a restaurant near you? Potential consumer responses to nutrition information disclosure on menus. Journal of Consumer Research, 36, 494–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Husted, R. (2005). Consumers say they are eating beef less often and cite health concerns: Issues update. Retrieved June 29, 2011 from http://www.beef.org/uDocs/groundbeefresearch.pdf.
  23. International Food Information Council. (2013). 2013 food & health survey: Consumer attitudes toward food safety, nutrition, & health. Available at: http://www.foodinsight.org/Resources/Detail.aspx?topic=2013_Food_Health_CPE_Webcast_Information.
  24. Keller, S., Landry, M., Olson, J., Velliquette, A., Burton, S., & Andrews, J. C. (1997). The effects of nutrition package claims, nutrition facts panels, and motivation to process nutrition information on consumer product evaluations. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 16, 256–269.Google Scholar
  25. Kenny, D. A. (2013). Mediation. Available at: http://davidakenny.net/cm/mediate.htm.
  26. Kidwell, B., Hardesty, D., & Childers, T. L. (2008). Emotional calibration effects on consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 35, 611–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kopalle, P. K., & Lehmann, D. R. (1995). The effects of advertised and observed quality on expectations about new product quality. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(3), 280–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kopalle, P. K., & Lehmann, D. R. (2001). Strategic management of expectations: the role of disconfirmation sensitivity and perfectionism. Journal of Marketing Research, 38, 386–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kozup, J., Creyer, E., & Burton, S. (2003). Making healthful food choices: the influence of health claims and nutrition information on consumer’s evaluations of packaged food products and restaurant menu items. Journal of Marketing, 67, 19–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Leonard, B. (2011). US chicken consumption increases in 2010 after three-year decline. Retrieved August 30, 2012 from http://www.wattagnet.com/US_chicken_consumption_increases_in_2010_after_three-year_decline.html.
  31. MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to statistical mediation. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  32. Maheswaran, D., & Chaiken, S. (1991). Promoting systematic processing in low-motivation settings: effect of incongruent information on processing and judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Maheswaran, D., Mackie, D. M., & Chaiken, S. (1992). Brand name as a heuristic cue: the effects of task importance and expectancy confirmation on consumer judgments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1(4), 317–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mitra, A., Hastak, M., Ford, G. T., & Ringold, D. J. (1999). Can the educationally disadvantaged interpret the FDA-mandated nutrition facts panel in the presence of an implied health claim? Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 18(1), 106–117.Google Scholar
  35. Newman, C. L., Howlett, E., & Burton, S. (2014). Shopper responses to front-of-package nutrition labeling programs: potential consumer and retail store benefits. Journal of Retailing, 90(1), 13–26.Google Scholar
  36. Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA). (1990). Public Law 101-535, 104 Stat. 2355.Google Scholar
  37. Olson, J. C., & Dover, P. A. (1976). Effects of expectation creation and disconfirmation on belief elements of cognitive structure. In B. B. Anderson (Ed.), Advances in consumer research (pp. 168–175). Cincinnati: Association for Consumer Research.Google Scholar
  38. Putrevu, S., & Ratchford, B. T. (1997). A model of search behavior with an application to grocery shopping. Journal of Retailing, 73, 463–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Roe, B., Levy, A., & Derby, B. (1999). The impact of health claims on consumer search and product evaluation outcomes: results from FDA experimental data. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 18, 89–105.Google Scholar
  40. Sherif, M., & Hovland, C. I. (1961). Social judgment: Assimilation and contrast effects in communication and attitude change. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: new procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Strahan, R., & Gerbasi, K. (1972). Short, homogeneous versions of the Marlowe-Crowne social desirability scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 28, 191–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Thorndike, E. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4, 25–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Trivedi, M. (2011). Regional and categorical patterns in consumer behavior: revealing trends. Journal of Retailing, 87, 18–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. USDA. (2013a). U.S. Beef and cattle industry: Background statistics and information. Retrieved December 28, 2013 from: http://www.ers.usda.gov/news/BSECoverage.htm.
  47. USDA. (2013b). U.S. Poultry production and value 2012 summary. Retrieved December 28, 2013 from: http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/MannUsda/viewDocumentInfo.do?documentID=1130.
  48. USDA, Agricultural Research Service. (2012). USDA national nutrient database for standard reference, Release 23. Retrieved June 21, 2012 from http://www.ars.usda.gov/ba/bhnrc/ndl.
  49. Wansink, B., & Chandon, P. (2006). Can ‘low fat’ nutrition labels lead to obesity? Journal of Marketing Research, 43, 605–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wilkie, W. L., & Moore, E. S. (2012). Expanding our understanding of marketing in society. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40, 53–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zeithaml, V., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1993). The nature and determinants of customer expectations of service. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 21, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of Marketing Science 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Scot Burton
    • 1
  • Laurel Aynne Cook
    • 2
  • Elizabeth Howlett
    • 1
  • Christopher L. Newman
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Marketing, Sam M. Walton College of BusinessUniversity of ArkansasFayettevilleUSA
  2. 2.College of Business & EconomicsWest Virginia UniversityMorgantownUSA
  3. 3.University of MississippiOxfordUSA

Personalised recommendations