Marketing Letters

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 883–891 | Cite as

The boomerang effect of mandatory sanitary messages to prevent obesity

  • Carolina O. C. Werle
  • Caroline Cuny


A variety of prevention measures are being adopted to counter obesity. One of them is to include health sanitary messages on advertisements for food products. We tested the efficacy of this type of measure in an experimental study with 131 participants who were randomly exposed to an advertisement for a hedonic product containing or not a sanitary message. Implicit memory representations (priming protocol), explicit attitudes (questionnaire) and a behavioral measure of food choice (healthy versus unhealthy snack) were collected. Results showed that participants associated negative concepts more easily to the product when the advertisement was presented without the sanitary message, while there were no differences in the explicit attitudes. Moreover, the choice of a healthy snack doubled in the absence of sanitary message. Contrary to its objectives, the obesity prevention sanitary message fills in consumers’ need for justification leading to a greater acceptability of the advertised product and increased choice of an unhealthy snack.


Obesity prevention Health policy Sanitary messages effectiveness Food advertising Need for justification 



We thank Jennifer S. Coelho and Frédéric Basso for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this manuscript.


  1. Basch, C. E., Zybert, P., & Shea, S. (1994). 5-A-DAY: Dietary behavior and the fruit and vegetable intake of Latino children. American Journal of Public Health, 84, 814–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berger, J., & Fitzsimons, G. (2008). Dogs on the street, pumas on your feet: How cues in the environment influence product evaluation and choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 45, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chandon, P., & Wansink, B. (2007). Is obesity caused by calorie underestimation? A psychophysical model of meal size estimation. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(1), 84–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chitturi, R., Raghunathan, R., & Mahajan, V. (2007). Form versus function: how the intensities of specific emotions evoked in functional versus hedonic trade-offs mediate product preferences. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(4), 702–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cunningham, W. A., & Zelazo, P. D. (2007). Attitudes and evaluations: A social cognitive perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 97–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dhar, T., & Baylis, K. (2011). Fast-food consumption and the ban on advertising targeting children: The Quebec experience. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(5), 799–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Halford, J. C. G., Gillespie, J., Brown, V., Pontin, E. E., & Dovey, T. M. (2004). Effect of television advertisements for foods on food consumption in children. Appetite, 42(2), 221–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Halford, J. C. G., Boyland, E. J., Hughes, G., Oliveira, L. P., & Dovey, T. M. (2007). Beyond-brand effect of television (TV) food advertisements/commercials on caloric intake and food choice of 5–7-year-old children. Appetite, 49(1), 263–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hammond, D., Fong, G. T., McDonald, P. W., Brown, K. S., & Cameron, R. (2004). Graphic Canadian cigarette warning labels and adverse outcomes: evidence from Canadian smokers. American Journal of Public Health, 94, 1442–1445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Harris, J. L., Bargh, J. A., & Brownell, K. D. (2009). Priming effects of television food advertising on eating behavior. Health Psychology, 28(4), 404–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hawkes, C. (2007). Regulating food marketing to young people worldwide: Trends and policy drivers. American Journal of Public Health, 97, 1962–1973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hoch, S. J., & Loewenstein, G. F. (1997). Time-inconsistent preferences and consumer self-control. Journal of Consumer Research, 17(4), 492–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Homer, P. M. (1990). The mediating role of attitude toward the ad: Some additional evidence. Journal of Marketing Research, 27(1), 78–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. INPES (2007) Post-test des messages sanitaires apposés sur les publicités alimentaires auprès des 8 ans et plus, Ministère de la santé, de la jeunesse et des sports et l'Institut National de Prévention et d'Education pour la Santé.Google Scholar
  15. Karpinski, A., & Hilton, J. L. (2001). Attitudes and the implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 774–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kees, J., Burton, S., Andrews, J. C., & Kozup, J. (2006). Test of graphic visuals and cigarette package warning combinations: Implications for the framework convention of tobacco control. JPP & M, 25(2), 212–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Keller, P. A., & Lehmann, D. R. (2008). Designing effective health communications: A meta-analysis. JPP & M, 27(2), 117–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Khan, U., & Dhar, R. (2006). Licensing effects in consumer choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(2), 259–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kivetz, R., & Simonson, I. (2002). Earning the right to indulge: Effort as a determinant of customer preferences toward frequency program rewards. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(2), 155–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lee, K., & Shavitt, S. (2009). Can McDonald’s food ever be considered healthful? metacognitive experiences affect the perceived understanding of a brand. Journal of Marketing Research, 46, 222–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lobstein, T., & Dibb, S. (2005). Evidence of a possible link between obesogenic food advertising and child overweight. Obesity Reviews, 6(3), 203–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Meyer, D. E., & Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1971). Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: Evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90(2), 227–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Neal, D. T., Wood, W., & Quinn, J. M. (2006). Habits: A repeat performance. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(4), 198–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Okada, E. M. (2005). Justification effects on consumer choice of hedonic and utilitarian goods. Journal of Marketing Research, 42(1), 43–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Perugini, M. (2005). Predictive models of implicit and explicit attitudes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 29–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rabiau, M., Knäuper, B., & Miquelon, P. (2006). The eternal quest for optimal balance between maximizing pleasure and minimizing harm: The compensatory health beliefs model. British Journal of Health Psychology, 11, 139–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sabanne, L. I., Lowrey, T. M., & Chebat, J. C. (2009). The effectiveness of cigarette warning label threats on nonsmoking adolescents. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 43(2), 332–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Strahilevitz, M., & Myers, J. G. (1998). Donations to charity as purchase incentives: How well they work may depend on what you are trying to sell. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 434–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Verplanken, B., & Wood, W. (2006). Breaking and creating habits: Consequences for public policy interventions. JPP & M, 25, 90–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Voss, K. E., Spangenberg, E. R., & Grohmann, B. (2003). Measuring the hedonic and utilitarian dimensions of consumer attitude. Journal of Marketing Research, 40(3), 310–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wilson, T. D. (2011). Redirect: The surprising new science of psychological change. London (UK): Allen Lane.Google Scholar
  32. Zimmerman, F. J., & Bell, J. F. (2010). Associations of television content type and obesity in children. American Journal of Public Health, 100, 334–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Grenoble Ecole de ManagementGrenobleFrance
  2. 2.CERAGGrenobleFrance

Personalised recommendations