Taste first leads to better dietary choices

Having worked in nutrition and health for many years, we’re all too familiar with the urge to nudge others towards better food habits by showcasing the positive effects of nutrition on our well-being. After all, many of us chose this profession out of a genuine interest in improving people’s health. But are we missing the mark with our health-focused messaging?

In today's fast-paced world, convenience often trumps health considerations, and making nutritious food choices is challenging. Even with plenty of healthy options and the proliferation of health-centric labels, many of us still favour taste and immediate gratification when making food choices. Health data indicate that most people are falling short of the dietary guidelines. But what if we could change the way we feel about food with just a few words.Researchers have made an intriguing discovery — the language we use to describe food can alter its taste and how rewarding it feels to our brains.

So how can we use the power of words to our advantage?

A study conducted several years ago by a group from Stanford University sheds light on a promising strategy to encourage healthier eating habits: flavour-focused food labelling.

This research explored how emphasising the appeal of vegetables through taste-focused labels can significantly increase vegetable intake, even in settings where there are plenty of less healthy options.

The Study:

Conducted across five university dining halls throughout the United States, the study involved a large-scale intervention aimed at testing the effectiveness of taste-focused labels compared to health-focused and basic labels in influencing vegetable selection and consumption.

The taste-focused labels used language to heighten diners’ expectations of a positive taste experience with healthy foods — using words about specific flavours and/or positive experiences. Examples include ‘Zesty Chilli-garlic Carrots and Broccoli’, ‘Classic Slow-roasted Rotisserie Vegetables’, and as a lover of Brussels sprout my personal favourite ‘Autumn Harvest Tender Brussels Sprouts’.

In contrast, the health-focused labels used words to communicate nutritional qualities and health benefits of vegetables. For example, ‘Healthy Choice Turnips’ or ‘Nutritious Green Beans’. Whereas the basic labels were short and nondescriptive, e.g., ‘Turnips’ or ‘Green Beans’.

The primary outcomes assessed by the authors included the proportion of diners opting for vegetables and the quantity of vegetables consumed. However, only one school had the capability to directly measure vegetable consumption. This was accomplished by weighing serving dishes each time they were placed on the serving line and again after they were emptied and removed. Waste was quantified by collecting plate waste from every diner, with all vegetable waste being carefully collected into a pre-weighed bin. Consumption was calculated by subtracting the mass of wasted vegetables from the total mass of vegetables selected. Values were adjusted to accommodate variations in the number of diners present each day. So data was collected at the group level rather than at the individual level.

In total, over 137,842 diner decisions spanning 185 days and encompassing 24 different vegetable types were analysed to assess the impact of these labelling strategies.

Key Findings:

The results of the study look impressive. Taste-focused labels were found to increase vegetable selection by 29% compared to health-focused labels and by 14% compared to basic labels.

Notably, it’s concerning that basic labels outperformed health-focused labels, albeit this difference did not reach statistical significance. But it does suggest by focusing on nutrition we may be barking up the wrong tree. Moreover, the quantity of vegetables consumed also experienced a notable uptick in response to the introduction of taste-focused labels. Diners selected a greater amount of vegetables with the taste-focused labels and there was no difference between conditions for the amount wasted. This meant there was a 39% increase in the amount of vegetables consumed with taste-focused label compared to the health-focused label.

Further analysis through supplementary studies delved into the mechanisms underlying these effects. They found that increased expectations of a positive taste experience played a crucial role in mediating the influence of taste-focused labels on vegetable selection. Additionally, moderation tests indicated that the effectiveness of taste-focused labels was heightened in settings where tastier vegetable recipes were served. The school where the vegetable recipes were rated as least tasty, the taste-focused labels did not budge the needle. In other words, the success of taste-focused labelling depends not only on the labels but also on factors such as the quality and appeal of the food being offered in each school's cafeteria — so the food still has to taste good, but you get more bang for your buck if you use taste-focused descriptions.

Implications:

These findings have significant implications for public health and nutrition initiatives. By highlighting the enjoyable and delectable aspects of vegetables, taste-focused labels offer a compelling strategy for promoting healthier food choices, particularly in environments where vegetables compete with less nutritious options. Importantly, the supplementary studies also showed that taste-focused labels outperformed other types of labels, including those containing positive words, fancy language, or lists of ingredients.  

Food for thought

When interpreting the findings, it’s crucial to acknowledge certain limitations. Firstly, data on the quantity vegetables consumed were only available from one of the five schools. Additionally, the authors were unable to assess the intervention's impact on individuals, including whether it influenced their choice of vegetables or other foods. Furthermore, understanding the practical implications of a 39% increase in vegetable intake is challenging without context. It would be useful to provide insights into what this percentage translates to on an individual level. For instance, compared to the health-focused label condition, participants exposed to taste-focused labels showed a 1.78 kg increase in vegetable intake. However, it remains unclear whether this equates to an extra teaspoon of beans or half a cup. This is not clear in the paper and so gaining a deeper understanding of the magnitude of the effect would enhance the interpretation of the results. 

Bottomline

While researchers and policy makers have rightly advocated for reducing exposure to enticing advertisements for unhealthy foods and implementing measures like red ‘traffic-light’ labels, health star labels, and graphic warning labels to deter unhealthy choices, we may be better served by investing energy and resources into an alternative angle — enhancing the appeal of nutritious foods.

In a world where taste frequently takes precedence in food choices, leveraging the power of flavour-centric labels is a promising approach to encourage individuals to make healthier dietary choices. As we continue to navigate the complex landscape of nutrition education and behaviour change, integrating such innovative strategies into public health initiatives hold promise for fostering healthier eating habits and combating diet-related health issues.

So, what’s on the menu for tonight? Nutritious Brussels Sprouts OR Tender Caramelised Brussels Sprouts with Lemon and Olive Oil Drizzle?