Tick Tock: Time for a Change?

Issue addressed: New developments in front-of-pack nutrition labelling are substantially improving the nutrition information available at the point of purchase. This has led to a need to reconsider the role of health logos such as the National Heart Foundation’s ‘Tick’. Methods: Using a qualitative, exploratory approach involving 10 focus groups with adults and children, this study investigated consumers’ attitudes to the Tick and its relevance to their purchase decisions. Results: Both adults and children exhibited awareness of the Tick and its aim to indicate healthier product alternatives. Views on the effectiveness of the Tick were polarised, with some considering it a useful tool and others querying the basis of its licensing arrangements. Conclusions: While the Tick has in the past played a role in assisting consumers to make more informed decisions and encouraging favourable modification of the food supply, recent questions relating to its role and credibility have resulted in the Heart Foundation deciding to retire it. So what?: After a quarter of a century in the Australian marketplace, the National Heart Foundation’s Tick program has been reviewed. The findings of the present study provide insight into consumers’ views of the Tick and suggest that the emergence of more comprehensive food labelling initiatives may make logo-based nutrition labels redundant

The unsolved value of executive coaching: a meta-analysis of outcomes using randomised control trial studies

Methodology and research supporting coaching’s effectiveness has not kept up with its growth and demand. The current literature on coaching is lacking sufficient empirical rigour and does not meet the standard required for mixed methods design. This meta- analysis investigated the outcomes of coaching, and potential moderating effects of other factors, using only randomised control trial studies. Outcomes studied included performance, well-being, coping, work attitudes, and goal-directed self-regulation. There were no moderating effects identified from participant age, type of measure, or author(s). The results showed that overall coaching has a moderate significant positive effect on coachees, p̂ = 0.42, which indicated that coaching is effective for individuals

Adults and children prefer a plate food guide relative to a pyramid

Background and Objective: This study explored attitudes toward two food guides currently being widely used in Australia: the Healthy Eating Pyramid and the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating Plate. Methods and Study Design: Ten focus groups were conducted with adults (aged 18+ years) and children (aged 10-17 years) across various locations in Perth, Western Australia. The discussions focused on liked and disliked aspects of each food guide and the implications for participants' perceptions of their relative usefulness. Results: When asked to state their preference, a large majority of participants nominated the plate as their preferred nutrition guide. The style of presentation used for the plate was reportedly clearer and more aesthetically pleasing. The plate was also perceived to be more complex while the pyramid was considered by adults to be more child-friendly. Conclusions: This study provides information on consumers' reactions to different food guides and the implications for perceived relevance and utility

Objective understanding of front-of-package nutrition labels: An international comparative experimental study across 12 countries

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

Evaluation of a workplace health and wellbeing training course delivered online and face-to-face

Organisations may benefit from training champions to promote healthy workplace environments and initiatives. This study compared the perceived usefulness and relative effectiveness of an employee training course offered via online and face-to-face formats. Individuals who took part in the training course were assessed on their perceived competence and confidence to implement changes pre-and post-training. Repeated measures Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and a t-test were conducted to test for significant differences between pre-and post-training scores and/or mode of training, respectively. Although the face-to-face training course was rated as slightly more useful, there were no significant differences between the two modes of training for the other dependent variables, and both modes led to significantly greater perceived competence and confidence post-training. These findings demonstrate the potential benefits of training employees to implement changes in their workplaces

The types and aspects of front-of-pack food labelling schemes preferred by adults and children.

There is strong interest in front-of-pack labels (FoPLs) as a potential mechanism for improving diets, and therefore health, at the population level. The present study examined Australian consumers' preferences for different types and attributes of FoPLs to provide additional insights into optimal methods of presenting nutrition information on the front of food packets. Much research to date has focused on two main types of FoPLs - those expressing daily intake values for specific nutrients and those utilising 'traffic light' colour coding. This study extends this work by: (i) including the new Health Star Rating system recently introduced in Australia and New Zealand; (ii) allowing a large sample of consumers to self-nominate the evaluation criteria they consider to be most important in choosing between FoPLs; (iii) oversampling consumers of lower socioeconomic status; and (iv) including children, who consume and purchase food in their own right and also influence their parents' food purchase decisions. A cross-sectional online survey of 2058 Australian consumers (1558 adults and 500 children) assessed preferences between a daily intake FoPL, a traffic light FoPL, and the Health Star Rating FoPL. Across the whole sample and among all respondent subgroups (males vs females; adults vs children; lower socioeconomic status vs medium-high socioeconomic status; normal weight vs overweight/obese), the Health Star Rating was the most preferred FoPL (44%) and the daily intake guide was the least preferred (20%). The reasons most commonly provided by respondents to explain their preference related to ease of use, interpretive content, and salience. The findings suggest that a simple to use, interpretive, star-based food label represents a population-based nutrition promotion strategy that is considered helpful by a broad range of consumers

Consumers’ responses to front-of-pack labels that vary by interpretive content

Previous research has shown that front-of-pack labels (FoPLs) can assist people to make healthier food choices if they are easy to understand and people are motivated to use them. There is some evidence that FoPLs providing an assessment of a food’s health value (evaluative FoPLs) are easier to use than those providing only numerical information on nutrients (reductive FoPLs). Recently, a new evaluative FoPL (the Health Star Rating (HSR)) has been introduced to Australia and New Zealand. The HSR features a summary indicator, differentiating it from many other FoPLs being used around the world. The aim of this study was to understand how consumers of all ages use and make sense of reductive FoPLs and evaluative FoPLs including evaluative FoPLs with and without summary indicators. Ten focus groups were conducted in Perth, Western Australia with adults (n=50) and children aged 10-17 years (n=35) to explore reactions to one reductive FoPL (the Daily Intake Guide), an existing evaluative FoPL (multiple traffic lights), and a new evaluative FoPL (the HSR). Participants preferred the evaluative FoPLs over the reductive FoPL, with the strongest preference being for the FoPL with the summary indicator (HSR). Discussions revealed the cognitive strategies used when interpreting each FoPL (e.g., using cut offs, heuristics, and the process of elimination), which differed according to FoPL format. Most participants reported being motivated to use the evaluative FoPLs (particularly the HSR) to make choices about foods consumed as part of regular daily meals, but not for discretionary foods consumed as snacks or deserts. The findings provide further evidence of the potential utility of evaluative FoPLs in supporting healthy food choices and can assist policy makers in selecting between alternative FoPL formats

A randomized trial assessing the effects of health claims on choice of foods in the presence of front-of-pack labels

Background: As a public health intervention, front-of-pack labels (FoPLs) have the potential to reach large numbers of consumers and promote healthier food choices. Of the different FoPLs, those that summarize a product's overall nutritional profile tend to be most effective in guiding healthier choices. However, information is lacking as to whether FoPLs are as effective when nutrient or health claims also appear on-pack. Objective: The aim of this study was to examine how the choice of foods of varying levels of healthfulness (less healthy, moderately healthy, and healthier) is affected by the appearance of various FoPLs (Daily Intake Guide, Multiple Traffic Lights, Health Star Rating) when shown in combination with different claim conditions (no claim, nutrient claim, general-level health claim, and higher-level health claim). Design: Adults and children (n = 2069) completed a discrete-choice experiment online. Respondents were shown 8 choice sets, each containing 4 alternatives of the same food type (cookies, cornflakes, pizza, or yogurt) of varying levels of healthfulness and were asked which product they would likely purchase (or they could select none). Respondents were randomly assigned to view 1 of the 3 FoPLs across all choice sets. Claim type and healthfulness varied within choice sets in accordance with a D-efficient design. Results: The probability of choosing a healthy product and avoiding an unhealthy product was greatest when only an FoPL (especially the Health Star Rating) appeared on-pack. The addition of a nutrient or health claim did not affect the likelihood of picking healthier products but did increase the likelihood of selecting less healthy foods across all FoPL conditions. Conclusions: FoPLs are most effective in helping consumers make better food choices when nutrient and health claims are not present. Policies are required to control how nutrient and health claims are applied to less healthy foods. This trial was registered as ACTRN12617000015347 (www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Resgistration/TrialReview.aspx?id=372055&isReview=true)

The relative ability of different front-of-pack labels to assist consumers discriminate between healthy, moderately healthy, and unhealthy foods

The degree to which different front-of-pack labels (FoPLs) can assist consumers to make healthy choices seems to depend on the extent to which the FoPLs provide an interpretation of the nutrition information presented. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of three FoPLs that vary by interpretive content in allowing consumers to discriminate between products of varying healthiness. Australian consumers (n = 2058) rated the perceived healthiness of mock food pack images that varied according to: nutritional profile (healthy, moderately healthy, unhealthy); FoPL (Daily Intake Guide (DIG), Multiple Traffic Lights (MTL), Health Star Rating (HSR), or control); and food type (cookies, cornflakes, pizza, yoghurt). Respondents were most accurate at differentiating unhealthy products from healthy (p < 0.001) and moderately healthy products (p = 0.015) when the HSR appeared on packs. The MTL was marginally (p = 0.052) effective at helping respondents distinguish between healthy and unhealthy products. When the DIG or no FoPL was used, however, respondents were unable to discriminate between a healthy and an unhealthy nutritional profile. Findings indicate that the HSR is more effective than other commonly used FoPLs in assisting consumers to accurately evaluate the healthiness of food products