Researchers at the HSE Institute for Cognitive Neuroscience have investigated how 'sugar-free' labelling affects consumers’ willingness to pay for such products. It was found that the label has little impact on the products’ appeal due to a trade-off between sweetness and healthiness: on the one hand, the label can deter consumers by implying an inferior taste, while on the other, it signals potential health benefits. The study findings have been published in Frontiers in Nutrition.
Russia has a very high level of sugar consumption, averaging 35 to 40 kg per person per year. Although 'sugar addiction' is not a diagnosed medical condition, research shows that sugary foods can trigger strong cravings and withdrawal symptoms remarkably similar to those seen in addictive behaviours.
Many consumers are aware of the risks associated with excessive sugar consumption and seek products with reduced or no sugar content. To make these products more noticeable on store shelves, manufacturers use special labels indicating low or no sugar. However, it remains unclear whether such labelling actually influences consumers’ dietary choices toward a healthier diet.
Scientists at the HSE Institute for Cognitive Neuroscience conducted an experiment to examine the effect of labelling on consumer behaviour. Participants were shown images of popular sweet foods, such as chocolate, cookies, and marshmallows. Their task was first to indicate how much they were willing to pay for each product and then to evaluate them on key attributes: familiarity, perceived sweetness, taste, and health benefits. One group of products contained regular sugar and was presented without any labels. The other group consisted of similar foods in which sugar had been replaced with natural sweeteners, such as honey or agave syrup. When these products were shown, a 'sugar-free' label appeared on the screen, and its meaning was explained to participants beforehand.
In the final stage of the experiment, a Becker–DeGroot–Marschak auction was used, in which participants were invited to purchase the products at a price they deemed acceptable. If their chosen price exceeded a value randomly set by the experimenter, they bought the product; if it was lower, they did not. This mechanism made it financially disadvantageous for participants to over- or underestimate their valuation, encouraging them to carefully consider each decision.
The results showed that, on average, participants were willing to pay the same amount for products with and without sugar. This lack of difference, however, was not due to participants ignoring the label, but rather to its contradictory effect on perception. Products labelled 'sugar-free' were consistently rated as less sweet and less tasty, yet simultaneously as healthier. Subsequent statistical tests and mediation analyses confirmed that these two factors—sweetness and healthiness—exerted opposing influences on willingness to pay, attracting and deterring consumers at the same time. As a result, the labelling had no overall effect.
'Our study demonstrates that the mechanisms of subjective perception, which remain poorly understood, can entirely undermine the effectiveness of food labels. To encourage consumers to choose healthier alternatives, it is not enough to simply communicate their benefits. Packaging and labelling must also convey both healthiness and tastiness, countering the common assumption that healthy foods are not as tasty,' asserts Ksenia Panidi, Senior Research Fellow at the HSE Institute for Cognitive Neuroscience and primary author of the study.
In the future, the researchers plan to investigate how the visual design of a label—such as its colour or shape—can either enhance or diminish its impact on consumers’ perception of the product.
'For example, bright colours are often associated with greater sweetness, green tones with naturalness and health benefits, while shiny packaging with a playful design can simultaneously enhance perceived tastiness and suggest that the product is less healthy. In this study, we used products without packaging to focus solely on the effect of labelling. Will the impact of labelling differ when combined with packaging for sugar-free products? Answering this question will be the next step in understanding how to effectively guide consumer choices toward healthier options,' says Panidi.
click here to read more