Adding good or removing bad: Consumer response to nutrition claims

Consumers often encounter nutrition claims on food packaging that emphasize either the addition of healthy nutrients (e.g., “with added vitamins”) or the removal of unhealthy ones (e.g., “now with less sugar”). But do these claims influence consumers differently, and if so, why? Across a meta-analysis and seven controlled experiments, we show that addition-focused claims consistently lead to stronger behavioral intentions than removal-focused claims. The studies show that this effect is driven in part by the higher perceived value of products with added (vs. removed) nutrients. These findings suggest that marketers and policy makers can more effectively promote healthier foods through addition claims. In addition, our studies show how marketers can mitigate the lower effectiveness of removal claims by following a communication strategy that explicitly highlights the value added.