In the last decade, labels have been multiplying on the food market, as a marketing tool to offer condensed and easy-to-process information about food product attributes to consumers (e.g., organic labels) but also as a public-policy tool to foster nutritious and sustainable food purchases (e.g., Nutri-Score). Yet, multi-labeling (i.e., displaying several labels on a packaging) can be effective (e.g., improving the value of the product) or counterproductive (e.g., decreasing one of the label’s value). Little research has been made on multi-labeling when the labels have simultaneously positive and negative valences (i.e., one label is perceived positively, the other negatively). However, such a situation could confuse consumers and therefore, harm multi-labeling ability to inform consumers clearly, and to promote healthy and sustainable food. Furthermore, to the state of our knowledge, multi-labelling has not been studied through the prism of information processing, and we think that multi-labeling could be processed by system 1 or system 2 (according to Kahneman’s theory, 2011) depending on the combination of labels.
To bridge these gaps, we investigate the impact of displaying simultaneously an Eco-Score (alternatively with a positive and a negative valence) and a Nutri-Score (with a positive valence), on consumers’ ways of processing and purchasing behaviors. To do so, we conducted an online between-subjects experiment comparing 3 conditions: (1) a combination of Nutri-Score A and Eco-Score B, (2) a combination of Nutri-Score A and Eco-Score E, and (3) a Nutri-Score A.
Our results indicate that multi-labeling is a double-edged sword. In comparison with displaying a Nutri-Score A: displaying a Nutri-Score A and an Eco-Score B enhances moral satisfaction (i.e., the personal benefits one derives when he/she contributes positively to certain causes) among the most ecology-sensitive consumers, though it does not significantly increase purchase intentions. Displaying a Nutri-Score A and an Eco-Score E increases consumer confusion (i.e., “a negatively valenced state of mind with emotional and cognitive components in which consumers lack comprehension or understanding of marketplace stimuli” (Fitzgerald et al., 2019, p. 308)), without negatively impacting purchase intentions. Furthermore, consumers process multi-labeling through two different routes: an automatic one (that does not require a mental effort) and a cognitive one (that does require a mental effort), depending on the valences of the combined labels. These routes correspond to the two systems of Kahneman (2011) in the information processing literature. Based on these results, we contribute to three streams of literature (multi-labeling, consumer confusion and information processing) and provide recommendations to food managers and public policy makers.
Keywords : Ecolabels; nutrition labels; food; multi-labeling; consumer confusion.
