↓ Skip to main content

Making food labels social: The impact of colour of nutritional labels and injunctive norms on perceptions and choice of snack foods

Overview of attention for article published in Appetite, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

24 tweeters
2 Facebook pages


30 Dimensions

Readers on

181 Mendeley
Making food labels social: The impact of colour of nutritional labels and injunctive norms on perceptions and choice of snack foods
Published in
Appetite, August 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.appet.2015.03.034
Pubmed ID

Milica Vasiljevic, Rachel Pechey, Theresa M. Marteau


Recent studies report that using green labels to denote healthier foods, and red to denote less healthy foods increases consumption of green- and decreases consumption of red-labelled foods. Other symbols (e.g. emoticons conveying normative approval and disapproval) could also be used to signal the healthiness and/or acceptability of consuming such products. The present study tested the combined effects of using emoticons and colours on labels amongst a nationally representative sample of the UK population (n = 955). In a 3 (emoticon expression: smiling vs. frowning vs. no emoticon) x3 (colour label: green vs. red vs. white) x2 (food option: chocolate bar vs. cereal bar) between-subjects experiment, participants rated the level of desirability, healthiness, tastiness, and calorific content of a snack bar they had been randomised to view. At the end they were further randomised to view one of nine possible combinations of colour and emoticon labels and asked to choose between a chocolate and a cereal bar. Regardless of label, participants rated the chocolate as tastier and more desirable when compared to the cereal bar, and the cereal bar as healthier than the chocolate bar. A series of interactions revealed that a frowning emoticon on a white background decreased perceptions of healthiness and tastiness of the cereal bar, but not the chocolate bar. In the explicit choice task selection was unaffected by label. Overall nutritional labels had limited effects on perceptions and no effects on choice of snack foods. Emoticon labels yielded stronger effects on perceptions of taste and healthiness of snacks than colour labels. Frowning emoticons may be more potent than smiling emoticons at influencing the perceived healthiness and tastiness of foods carrying health halos.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 181 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Ecuador 1 <1%
Unknown 174 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 16%
Student > Bachelor 29 16%
Researcher 21 12%
Unspecified 21 12%
Other 45 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 36 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 12%
Social Sciences 20 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 20 11%
Psychology 20 11%
Other 64 35%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 June 2017.
All research outputs
of 13,432,277 outputs
Outputs from Appetite
of 3,192 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 224,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Appetite
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,432,277 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,192 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 224,076 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.