Improving consumer understanding of pesticide toxicity labels: experimental evidence.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hosni H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC11283515 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Improving consumer understanding of pesticide toxicity labels: experimental evidence.
Hosni Hanin H Segovia Michelle M Zhao Shuoli S Palma Marco A MA Skevas Theodoros T
Scientific reports 20240727 1
Consumers often inadvertently misperceive the health hazards associated with over-the-counter pesticides under the current textual labeling policy, potentially leading to improper use. We conducted an incentivized framed field experiment with eye tracking to evaluate the effectiveness of the current pesticide labels that convey risk using signal words (Caution, Warning, Danger) compared to two visually focused label alternatives: traffic light colors and skull intensity symbols. A total of 166 p ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:The increase in packaged food and beverage portion sizes has been identified as a potential factor implicated in the rise of the prevalence of obesity. In this context, the objective of this systematic scoping review was to investigate how healthy adults perceive and interpret serving size information on food packages and how this influences product perception and consumption. Such knowledge is needed to improve food labelling understanding and guide consumers toward healthier portion size choices. A search of seven databases (2010 to April 2019) provided the records for title and abstract screening, with relevant articles assessed for eligibility in the full-text. Fourteen articles met the inclusion criteria, with relevant data extracted by one reviewer and checked for consistency by a second reviewer. Twelve studies were conducted in North America, where the government regulates serving size information. Several studies reported a poor understanding of serving size labelling. Indeed, consumers interpreted the labelled serving size as a recommended serving for dietary guidelines for healthy eating rather than a typical consumption unit, which is set by the manufacturer or regulated in some countries such as in the U.S. and Canada. Not all studies assessed consumption; however, larger labelled serving sizes resulted in larger self-selected portion sizes in three studies. However, another study performed on confectionary reported the opposite effect, with larger labelled serving sizes leading to reduced consumption. The limited number of included studies showed that labelled serving size affects portion size selection and consumption, and that any labelled serving size format changes may result in increased portion size selection, energy intake and thus contribute to the rise of the prevalence of overweight and obesity. Research to test cross-continentally labelled serving size format changes within experimental and natural settings (e.g., at home) are needed. In addition, tailored, comprehensive and serving-size-specific food literacy initiatives need to be evaluated to provide recommendations for effective serving size labelling. This is required to ensure the correct understanding of nutritional content, as well as informing food choices and consumption, for both core foods and discretionary foods.
| S-EPMC6770558 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Residues of pesticides on crops can result in mortality to foraging bees. Pesticide applicators in the U.S. encounter a statement on pesticide labels, which coarsely indicate which products dissipate over the course of an evening. There is reason to suspect that these statements may not align with residual toxicity data, given previous findings. Without a complete database of residual toxicity estimates; however, it is not possible to determine whether the residual toxicity components of statements on pesticide labels similarly diverge from published studies. We compiled 50 studies on residual toxicity trials with formulated pesticides and calculated the residual time to 25% mortality (RT25) of each assay for three different bee species (Apis mellifera, Nomia melanderi, and Megachile rotundata). Our findings were compared to a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published database of RT25 values. Of the RT25 values that we could compare, we found that over 90% of the values support a similar conclusion to the EPA. Next, we compared our values and the EPA's values to the statements on 155 EPA registered pesticide product labels. Of these labels, a little less than a third presented their residual toxicity in a manner inconsistent with their calculated RT25 and current EPA labeling guidelines. Moreover, over a third of labels contained an active ingredient which was neither listed under the EPA's RT25 database nor had a published study to estimate this value. We provide the first evidence that many pesticide labels may convey residual toxicity information to applicators that is not correct and could lead to bees being exposed to toxic residues on plants.
| S-EPMC10771081 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Front-of-package labelling is a cost-effective strategy to help consumers make healthier choices and informed food purchases. The effect of labels is mediated by consumer understanding and acceptability of the label. We compared the acceptability and understanding of labels used in Latin-America among low- and middle-income Mexican adults. METHODS:Participants (n = 2105) were randomly assigned to one of three labels: Mexican Guideline Daily Allowances (GDA), Ecuador's Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), or Chile's Warning Labels (WL) in red. Label acceptability was evaluated through items regarding likeability, attractiveness and perceived cognitive workload. Objective understanding was evaluated by asking participants to select the product with the lowest nutritional quality among three products. We measured the time participants took to choose the product. Differences in label acceptability, understanding and time required to choose a product across labels were tested. RESULTS:Compared to the GDA, a higher proportion of participants liked the MTL and WL, considered them attractive, and with a lower perceived cognitive workload (p < 0.05). Participants had 4.00 (2.86-5.59) times the odds of correctly identifying the product with the lowest nutritional quality when using the MTL label and 4.52 (3.24-6.29) times the odds when using the WL, in comparison to the GDA. Time required to choose the product was lower for the MTL (Median: 11.25 s; IQR = 8.00-16.09) and the WL (Median = 11.94 s, IQR = 8.56-16.52) compared to the GDA (Median: 15.31 s; IQR = 10.81-20.21; p < 0.05). No differences were observed between the MTL and the WL. CONCLUSIONS:GDA had the lowest acceptability and understanding among the labels tested. The MTL and the WL were more accepted and understood, and allowed low- and middle-income consumers to make nutrition-quality related decisions more quickly. WL or MTL may foster healthier food choices in the most vulnerable groups in Mexico compared to the current labelling format.
| S-EPMC6938009 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Front-of-Package labels (FoPLs) are efficient tools for increasing consumers' awareness of foods' nutritional quality and encouraging healthier choices. A label's design is likely to influence its effectiveness; however, few studies have compared the ability of different FoPLs to facilitate a consumer understanding of foods' nutritional quality, especially across sociocultural contexts. This study aimed to assess consumers' ability to understand five FoPLs [Health Star Rating system (HSR), Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), Nutri-Score, Reference Intakes (RIs), and Warning symbol] in 12 different countries. In 2018, approximately 1000 participants per country were recruited and asked to rank three sets of label-free products (one set of three pizzas, one set of three cakes, and one set of three breakfast cereals) according to their nutritional quality, via an online survey. Participants were subsequently randomised to one of five FoPL conditions and were again asked to rank the same sets of products, this time with a FoPL displayed on pack. Changes in a participants' ability to correctly rank products across the two tasks were assessed by FoPL using ordinal logistic regression. In all 12 countries and for all three food categories, the Nutri-Score performed best, followed by the MTL, HSR, Warning symbol, and RIs.
| S-EPMC6213801 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTomatoes are consumed daily. Unfortunately, abuse of pesticide application by vegetable growers in Uganda increases risks of pesticide residue exposure among consumers, as they may be above Maximum Residue Limits (European Union Maximum Residue Limits used as a standard in Uganda). This study aimed to determine consumer attitudes and risk perceptions towards pesticide-stained tomatoes in Uganda to support interventions that could be used to reduce pesticide residue exposures in food.MethodsA mixed methods cross-sectional study sampled 468 household consumers in four regions of Uganda, selecting one district (interventional project area) per region. In each district, about 60 household members were randomly selected from a total of three Sub Counties and interviewed. In addition, 9 tomato handlers (three tomato farmers, three tomato retailers, and three tomato wholesalers) participated in Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) per district. Collected data were entered into MS-Excel 13 and exported into Stata version 14.0 for cleaning and analysis at a 5% level of significance and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI). The proportion of risk perceptions and attitudes were computed and presented as percentages, while factors associated with risk perception were determined using Fisher exact test. Qualitative data collected under a traditional theory were analyzed using thematic content analysis.ResultsMore than half, 54.2% (253/468), of the respondents were females, mean age was 37 years (SD = 13.13, ranging from 18 to 88 years). Half of the respondents, 50.9% (238/467), were farmers by occupation, and 40.3% (188/468) had completed upper primary education. Only 5.0% (20/396) of consumers reported a high-risk perception towards tomatoes stained with pesticide residues, the rest, 95.0% (376/396), were buying pesticide-stained tomatoes despite their awareness of the possible health effects. The main reason for buying the pesticide-stained tomatoes was that a majority, 59.0% (230/390), lacked an alternative to stained tomatoes like organically grown tomatoes. However, consumers generally had a negative attitude towards pesticide-stained tomatoes, with 67.0% (313/468) of the consumers disagreeing with the statement that tomatoes sold on the market are safe. Consumer risk perception was significantly associated with their awareness about residues in the tomatoes; where the proportion of consumers who were aware of the risk of pesticide-stained tomatoes was 42.8 times more likely not to buy stained tomatoes compared to the proportion of those who were not aware. OR, 42.8 (95% CI: 10.76-170.28). However, after Fisher-Exact tests analysis, level of education P(0.975), gender P(0.581), and age group P(0.680) were not associated with consumer risk perception (95% CI and 5% level of significance).ConclusionAlthough the consumers had a negative attitude towards the pesticide-stained tomatoes, their risk perception towards them ranked low, with most consumers buying tomatoes stained with pesticide residues due to a lack of an alternative. Ministry of Agriculture extension service efforts should promote and emphasize community to start household-based organic kitchen gardens as the efforts for the establishment of a national pesticide residue monitoring center awaits.
| S-EPMC10723735 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Absence labels promote the absence of a particular ingredient or production practice. Consumers usually perceive organic labels as an umbrella absence label for a variety of ingredients and production practices. Such organic labels often use similar language but are based on different certification requirements. For example, both organic wine and wine made with organic grapes are available to U.S. consumers, but little is known about consumer preferences for such labeled products when information about the certification standards is available. Moreover, while absence labels, which advertise the absence of certain attributes or practices, are prevalent on the market, little is known about how information on conventional production practices impacts consumer behavior. Using an artefactual experiment with 128 adult non-student participants, we investigate consumer demand for conventional wine, organic wine, and wine made with organic grapes when information about production standards is provided to participants with and without details regarding conventional winemaking practices. We find that while both organic labels carry a significant and very similar willingness-to-pay (WTP) premium, information about certification standards and conventional wine making practices can reduce WTP for all wines. Providing information about the two organic certification standards reduces consumer WTP for both absence labeled and conventional wine categories. This effect largely disappears for organic wine, but not wine made with organic grapes, when information about conventional wine-making practices is also provided.
| S-EPMC6594594 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe National Academy of Medicine recommends that the U.S. adopt an interpretative front-of-package food labeling system, but uncertainty remains about how this system should be designed. This study examined reactions to front-of-package food labeling systems that use positive labels to identify healthier foods, negative labels to identify unhealthier foods, or both.MethodsIn August 2021, U.S. adults (N=3,051) completed an online randomized experiment. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 labeling conditions: control (calorie), positive, negative, or both positive and negative labels. Labels were adapted from designs for a 'healthy' label drafted by the Food and Drug Administration and displayed on the front of product packaging. Participants selected products to purchase, identified healthier products, and reported reactions to the labels. Analyses, conducted in 2022, examined the healthfulness of participants' selections using the Ofcom Nutrient Profiling Model score (0-100, higher scores indicate being healthier).ResultsParticipants exposed to only positive labels, only negative labels, or both positive and negative labels had healthier selections than participants in the control arm (differences vs control=1.13 [2%], 2.34 [4%] vs 3.19 [5%], respectively; all p<0.01). The both-positive-and-negative-labels arm outperformed the only-negative-labels (p=0.03) and only-positive-labels (p<0.001) arms. The only-negative-labels arm outperformed the only-positive-labels arm (p=0.005). All the 3 interpretative labeling systems also led to improvements in the identification of healthier products and beneficial psychological reactions (e.g., attention, thinking about health effects; all p<0.05).ConclusionsFront-of-package food labeling systems that use both positive and negative labels could encourage healthier purchases and improve understanding more than systems using only positive or only negative labels.
| S-EPMC10166580 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We examine the heterogeneous effects of reference pricing, a health insurance reform introduced by the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS), on the distribution of spending by patients and insurers. Using medical claims data for CalPERS and a comparison group not subject to reference pricing, we use the changes-in-changes approach to estimate the quantile treatment effects of the program across different medical procedures. We find that the quantile treatment effects vary across the patient spending distributions, with a range of positive and negative estimates of the QTE, depending on the medical procedure considered. However, across all procedures, the insurer's spending distributions tend to shift left, with the largest reductions occurring in the right-tail of the spending distributions. These effects are not captured by mean estimates but have important policy implications.
| S-EPMC9922490 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study objectivesWe aimed to investigate how different presentation formats influence comprehension and use of comparative performance information (CPI) among consumers.MethodsAn experimental between-subjects and within-subjects design with manipulations of CPI presentation formats. We enrolled both consumers with lower socioeconomic status (SES)/cognitive skills and consumers with higher SES/cognitive skills, recruited through an online access panel. Respondents received fictitious CPI and completed questions about interpretation and information use. Between subjects, we tested (1) displaying an overall performance score (yes/no); (2) displaying a small number of quality indicators (5 vs 9); and (3) displaying different types of evaluative symbols (star ratings, coloured dots and word icons vs numbers and bar graphs). Within subjects, we tested the effect of a reduced number of healthcare providers (5 vs 20). Data were analysed using descriptive analysis, analyses of variance and paired-sampled t tests.ResultsA total of 902 (43%) respondents participated. Displaying an overall performance score and the use of coloured dots and word icons particularly enhanced consumer understanding. Importantly, respondents provided with coloured dots most often correctly selected the top three healthcare providers (84.3%), compared with word icons (76.6% correct), star ratings (70.6% correct), numbers (62.0%) and bars (54.2%) when viewing performance scores of 20 providers. Furthermore, a reduced number of healthcare providers appeared to support consumers, for example, when provided with 20 providers, 69.5% correctly selected the top three, compared with 80.2% with five providers.DiscussionParticular presentation formats enhanced consumer understanding of CPI, most importantly the use of overall performance scores, word icons and coloured dots, and a reduced number of providers displayed. Public report efforts should use these formats to maximise impact on consumers.
| S-EPMC5136725 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Front-of-Package (FOP) labels highlight important nutrients and help consumers make informed decisions about food purchases. In this study, we investigated consumer comprehension, opinion, and preference associated with two different formats of FOP labels and compared consumer shopping behavior and general trends related to nutrition labeling. Consumer eye-tracking was used for measuring perceived understanding of nutritional information objectively. Results revealed that a color-coded FOP label would garner more attention than a black and white FOP label. Subjects found color-coded FOP labels more straightforward than black and white labels. Participants used the information provided on the FOP for shopping goals. Still, FOPs did not affect objective consumer attention to labels, and labeling schemes did not significantly affect participants' decisions. Participating subjects did use FOP labels instead of the nutrition facts panels. Still, FOP groups scored lower on a nutrition literacy quiz, indicating that their perceived and actual understanding of nutritional information differed. Our findings suggest that subjects pay attention to FOP labels but do not make decisions.
| S-EPMC8749384 | biostudies-literature