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

NCT ID: NCT07186270

Last Updated: 2025-09-23

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

NOT_YET_RECRUITING

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

1000 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2025-10-31

Study Completion Date

2025-12-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

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.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

The investigators will conduct experiments in both Korea and Singapore, focusing on two settings with various food items: restaurant menu choices and grocery item selections. For each item, investigators will elicit consumers' prior belief about its healthiness. Our research builds upon the work of Haws et al. (2017), which demonstrated that US consumers tend to overgeneralize their belief about "expensive=healthy" to product categories where it is not true. This tendency potentially biases perceptions of healthy foods. The investigators aim to test this "expensive=healthy" intuition and its impact on food choice, with and without FOP labels, in Asian contexts. The investigators hypothesize that absent FOP labels, consumers will infer healthiness from price information (i.e., this product is expensive, so it must be healthy) and that providing FOP labels will reduce the reliance on this inference. The investigators also hypothesize that such effects of FOP labels are more prominent for products where the perceived healthiness by consumers significantly differs from the healthiness indicated by the labels. When the FOP labels show 'less healthy' for those expensive and perceived as 'healthy' products, consumers will update their prior belief about its healthiness and be more likely to drop the intuition 'expensive=healthiness' in decision-making and respond to a greater extent.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Consumer Behavior

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

SEQUENTIAL

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.
Primary Study Purpose

HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Study 1: Restaurant menu choice experiment

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.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

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

Intervention Type 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 2: Grocery Food Item Choice Experiment

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.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

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

Intervention Type 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

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

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

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

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

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

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

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Adults aged 18-65 years residing in Korea
* Adults aged 21-65 years residing in Singapore
Maximum Eligible Age

65 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Korea University

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

National University of Singapore

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Soye Shin

Assistant Professor

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Sang Hyeon Lee

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Korea University

Soye Shin

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Duke-NUS Graduate Medical School

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Soye Shin

Role: CONTACT

+6566013319

Linh Nguyen

Role: CONTACT

+6590786645

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

000273

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Understanding Food Choices (Aim 2)
NCT05537337 COMPLETED NA