Organic food labels bias food healthiness perceptions: Estimating healthiness equivalence using a Discrete Choice Experiment

Individuals perceive organic food as being healthier and containing fewer calories than conventional foods. We provide an alternative way to investigate this organic halo effect using a mirrored method to Choice Experiments applied to healthiness judgments. In an experimental study (N = 415), we examined whether healthiness judgments toward a 200 g cookie box are impacted by the organic label, nutrition information (fat and sugar levels), and price and determined the relative importance of these attributes. In particular, we assessed whether food with an organic label could contain more fat or sugar and yet be judged to be of equivalent healthiness to food without this label. We hoped to estimate the magnitude of any such effect. Moreover, we explored whether these effects were obtained when including a widely used system for labeling food healthiness, the Traffic Light System. Although participants' healthiness choices were mainly driven by the reported fat and sugar content, the organic label also influenced healthiness judgments. Participants showed an organic halo effect leading them to consider the organic cookie as healthy as a conventional one despite containing more fat and sugar. Specifically, they considered the organic cookie as equivalent in healthiness to a conventional one, although containing 14% more of the daily reference intake for sugar and 30% more for fat. These effects did not change when including the Traffic Light System. This effect of the organic label could have implications for fat and sugar intake and consequent impacts on health outcomes.