Experiments assessed the magnifying glass symbol’s role in food labeling, revealing potential limitations versus text-only warnings.
Front‐of‐package labeling (FoPL) systems often use text and visuals to help communicate information about nutrients potentially linked to chronic diseases. While systems like the European Nutri‐Score and the Latin black octagon emphasize clear warnings, the magnifying glass, adopted in Brazil and Canada, lacks clarity in its semiotic interpretation, warranting further study. This research conducted two experiments to assess the magnifying glass's impact on consumer choices: one with eye‐tracking ( n = 30) and another without ( n = 408). Fot this, mock packages of dulce de leche w ere developed for the study. These packages featured statements such as “High in added sugar,” “High in saturated fat,” and “High in added sugar and saturated fat,” presented with or without the magnifying glass symbol. Results showed that combining “High in (…)” warnings with the magnifying glass had a weaker effect on reducing product choice than text‐only labels. Additionally, dual‐nutrient warnings (sugar and saturated fat) consistently had a stronger negative effect on choices than single‐nutrient warnings, regardless of the symbol.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Silva et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: