Introduction
Following our presentation on the article "Can “Low-Fat Nutrition Labels Lead to Obesity?” by Brian Wansink and Pierre Chandon, we would like to analyse in greater detail the implications of their findings.
Firstly, it is necessary to summarise what Wansink and Chandon discovered during their three studies. As a result of the first study, it was found that low-fat nutrition labels lead people to eat more, resulting in a lower consumption of fat but a greater intake of calories; this was particularly the case with participants deemed to be "overweight”. This was because people tend to underestimate the number of calories in food types labeled "low-fat". Wansink and Chandon developed their analysis and from the two studies which followed, found that another explanation for the increase in consumption is that low-fat labels increase consumers’ perception of the appropriate serving size. This was the case regardless of participant BMI, since people overestimate the decrease in fat and calories when eating "low-fat" food and believe they can increase their consumption accordingly. Finally, "low-fat" labels decrease the consumer’s sense of guilt, particularly those who are overweight. Therefore, they can eat more of a "low-fat" food before guilt kicks in and they stop. Before they know it, they’ve consumed more calories than if they had chosen the regular option.
We would now like to analyze in-depth the implications of Wansink and Chandon’s findings, both in general and with regards to marketing practices.
Study 1: Do low fat nutrition labels increase consumption?
The study 1 was conducted with 269 participants in a university house opening. The research team set 2 bowls of M&M chocolate candies, one with the label “regular M&M”, another with the label “low-fat M&M”. The study was done to see whether the consumption is more or less when there is a low-fat label as well as to see whether or not people have an estimation bias on calorie when