IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v75y2017icp176-184.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mystification and obfuscation in portion sizes in UK food products

Author

Listed:
  • Szmigin, Isabelle
  • Gee, Veronica

Abstract

Concern has been expressed as to how obesity is framed as an individual responsibility easily solved with common sense. Such research has questioned the appropriateness of a size-based emphasis to public health. Moving away from the emphasis on the individual, this paper critically reviews consumer marketing techniques in the presentation of portion sizes, given what is known about human cognitive and physical limitations around food choice. Through a micro study of portion size in three products, cereals, cereal bars and yogurts, claims are made regarding marketing techniques of obfuscation in portion size presentation that at a macro level link to earlier critiques of marketing mystification. Findings suggest a number of specific obfuscators that could lead to passive overconsumption. The paper concludes that regulators should shift their emphasis away from the individual to examining marketing mystification and techniques of obfuscation. Information presentation should be more appropriate and consistent across brands within a product category.

Suggested Citation

  • Szmigin, Isabelle & Gee, Veronica, 2017. "Mystification and obfuscation in portion sizes in UK food products," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 176-184.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:75:y:2017:i:c:p:176-184
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.07.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296316306725
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.07.016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chandon, Pierre & Wansink, Brian, 2011. "Is Food Marketing Making Us Fat? A Multi-Disciplinary Review," Foundations and Trends(R) in Marketing, now publishers, vol. 5(3), pages 113-196, July.
    2. Andreyeva, T. & Long, M.W. & Brownell, K.D., 2010. "The impact of food prices on consumption: A systematic review of research on the price elasticity of demand for food," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 100(2), pages 216-222.
    3. Alvesson, Mats, 1994. "Critical theory and consumer marketing," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 291-313, September.
    4. Julie A. Caswell & Daniel I. Padberg, 1992. "Toward a More Comprehensive Theory of Food Labels," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(2), pages 460-468.
    5. Park, C Whan & Iyer, Easwar S & Smith, Daniel C, 1989. "The Effects of Situational Factors on In-Store Grocery Shopping Behavior: The Role of Store Environment and Time Available for Shopping," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(4), pages 422-433, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marano-Marcolini, Carla & Torres-Ruiz, Francisco J., 2017. "A consumer-oriented model for analysing the suitability of food classification systems," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 176-189.
    2. Rudi, Jeta & Çakır, Metin, 2017. "Vice or virtue: How shopping frequency affects healthfulness of food choices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 207-217.
    3. Allais, Olivier & Etilé, Fabrice & Lecocq, Sébastien, 2015. "Mandatory labels, taxes and market forces: An empirical evaluation of fat policies," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 27-44.
    4. David O. Yawson & Barry J. Mulholland & Tom Ball & Michael O. Adu & Sushil Mohan & Philip J. White, 2017. "Effect of Climate and Agricultural Land Use Changes on UK Feed Barley Production and Food Security to the 2050s," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-14, October.
    5. Jakina Debnam, 2017. "Selection Effects and Heterogeneous Demand Responses to the Berkeley Soda Tax Vote," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1172-1187.
    6. Yizhao Jiang, 2022. "The Influence of Payment Method: Do Consumers Pay More with Mobile Payment?," Papers 2210.14631, arXiv.org.
    7. Zhang, Yinjunjie & Palma, Marco A., 2018. "Revisiting the Effects of Sugar Tax on Demand Elasticities - Evidence from the BLP Demand Model," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 273978, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Härkänen, Tommi & Kotakorpi, Kaisa & Pietinen, Pirjo & Pirttilä, Jukka & Reinivuo, Heli & Suoniemi, Ilpo, 2014. "The welfare effects of health-based food tax policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 196-206.
    9. Hunt Allcott & Benjamin B Lockwood & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2019. "Regressive Sin Taxes, with an Application to the Optimal Soda Tax," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(3), pages 1557-1626.
    10. Leenders, Mark A.A.M. & Smidts, Ale & Haji, Anouar El, 2019. "Ambient scent as a mood inducer in supermarkets: The role of scent intensity and time-pressure of shoppers," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 270-280.
    11. Maples, McKenzie & Morgan, Kimberly L. & Interis, Matthew G. & Harri, Ardian, 2013. "Who Buys Food Directly from Producers in the Southeastern United States?," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 45(3), pages 509-518, August.
    12. Liu, Yizao & Lopez, Rigoberto A. & Zhu, Chen, 2014. "The Impact of Four Alternative Policies to Decrease Soda Consumption," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(1), pages 53-68, April.
    13. Etilé, Fabrice & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2013. "Corporate social responsibility and the economics of consumer social responsibility," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 94(2).
    14. Cosnard, Lionel & Laborde, David, 2019. "Taxing Sugar and Sugary Products to Reduce Obesity: A CGE Assessment of Several Tax Policies," Conference papers 333067, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    15. Alasdair Gardiner, 2016. "Implications of a Sugar Tax in New Zealand: Incidence and Effectiveness," Treasury Working Paper Series 16/09, New Zealand Treasury.
    16. Bahel, Eric & Marrouch, Walid & Gaudet, Gérard, 2013. "The economics of oil, biofuel and food commodities," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 599-617.
    17. Naman Sreen & Swetarupa Chatterjee & Seema Bhardwaj & Asmita Chitnis, 2023. "Reasons and intuitions: extending behavioural reasoning theory to determine green purchase behavior," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 20(2), pages 447-475, June.
    18. An, Ruopeng, 2015. "Nationwide expansion of a financial incentive program on fruit and vegetable purchases among Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participants: A cost-effectiveness analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 80-88.
    19. Phillips, Megan & Parsons, Andrew G. & Wilkinson, Helene J. & Ballantine, Paul W., 2015. "Competing for attention with in-store promotions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 141-146.
    20. van den Bijgaart, I.M., 2017. "Too slow a change? Deep habits, consumption shifts and transitory tax," Working Papers in Economics 701, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:75:y:2017:i:c:p:176-184. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.