18 pages., via online journal, As food products marketed as “gluten-free” become increasingly popular, many consumers start to exclude sources of gluten (e.g., wheat, barley, and rye) from their diets for both medical and non-medical purposes. The grain industry is facing a growing challenge to (re)boost consumers’ confidence in the healthiness and safety of its commodities. Using 561 participants recruited from the Amazon Mechanical Turk workers’ panel, this study implemented a 2 (pretzels vs. potato chips) * 2 (positive- vs. negative- frame) * 2 (wheat image vs. no wheat image) experiment to examine the effects of gluten-free labels on consumers’ perceived healthiness and safety of wheat, perceived benefits of labeled products, and their evaluation of the shown labels. Results showed that consumers evaluate the gluten-free labels most positively when they appear on products that could have contained gluten. For products that are naturally gluten-free, adding a gluten-free label only decreased consumers’ confidence in such labels. The presence of gluten-free labels increased consumers’ perceived benefits of the labeled products when they do not contain any misleading information (e.g., image of a wheat head). However, some gluten-free labels could have negative impacts on consumers’ perceptions of the healthiness and safety of wheat. Overall, food producers and marketers might have undervalued consumers’ literacy and overestimated their susceptibility to marketing strategies. We discussed the implications for food marketers, regulators, and communicators.
21 pages, Because mothers are the primary grocery shoppers for most households, they play a fundamental role in the food their families eat. As such, it is important to understand their perceptions of potential sources of food safety and nutrition information. This study surveyed young mothers (i.e., 18-40 years old) across the United States to assess their awareness, knowledge, and trust of celebrities and social media influencers who communicate about food-related topics. The list of celebrities and influencers consisted of TV chefs, celebrities and influencers who espouse favorable viewpoints of food and agriculture, and celebrities and influencers who espouse more alternative viewpoints of food and agriculture. Respondents were usually more aware and knowledgeable of the celebrities and chefs than the influencers. They also generally trusted the TV chefs the most. There tended to be small-to-medium positive correlations between a respondents’ knowledge of a celebrity/influencer and their trust of that celebrity/influencer but not all were statistically significant. Communicators looking to influence the largest number of people would benefit more from working with celebrities, but social media influencers could still play a role in campaigns that target specific online communities where the influencers’ values align with community members. More research is recommended to expand to other audiences, as well as assessing other celebrities and influencers. Research can also address how consumers use social media to get food-related information, how trust could be affected by communication using different social media platforms, and content analyses of food-related communication by celebrities and influencers on social media outlets.
