In the last decade, labels have been multiplying on food products (e.g., organic labels, Nutri- Score) to foster nutritious and sustainable food purchases, as such raising the question of the effect of multi-labelling. In this article, we use the prism of information processing and specifically address the question of multi-labelling when the labels have simultaneously positive and negative valences. Such a situation could confuse consumers and therefore, harm multi-labelling ability to empower consumers. An experiment shows that 1/ adding a good Eco- Score to a good Nutri-Score enhances warm glow among the most ecology-sensitive consumers, though it does not significantly increase purchase intentions, 2/ adding a bad Eco- Score to a good Nutri-Score increases consumer confusion (i.e., a discomfort due to ambiguous stimuli that requires mental efforts to cope with) but does not decrease purchase intentions. Recommendations to food managers and public policy makers result from these results.

Considering meat consumption's massive impact on climate change, environmental NGOs are increasingly campaigning to encourage consumers to reduce unsustainable meat consumption, i.e., to eat less and/or better meat. They usually use messages based on environmental appeals to do so. Yet, the effectiveness of such appeals in international campaigns may depend on countries as cultural beliefs influence food consumption behaviors. Therefore, in this research, we explore the effectiveness of such campaigns across 5 European countries, controlling for individual cultural orientations. Considering an environmental degradation appeal, we first show that countries have no influence on the campaign’s effectiveness, unlike specific individual cultural orientations, including masculinity and uncertainty avoidance. We replicate these results in the same 5 countries considering an alternative appeal, i.e., animal welfare. Recommendations to international NGOs managers result from these results.

Although wellness may represent a status symbol in some contexts, recent studies have pointed that healthy food remains largely associated with a negative social image (Stead, McDermott, MacKintosh, & Adamson, 2011). This negative perception may very well represent a hindering factor to the adoption of healthy food by a large number of people and contribute to the health and economic problems associated with high BMI. This paper investigates whether the social status of healthy food can be improved. Manipulating the number of followers on a social media account, we study how this social validation cue can stimulate consumers to eat more healthily. Furthermore, we explore the mechanism that may lead to positive consumer responses towards the message and the healthy food. A between-subject experiment on 290 individuals aged between 17 and 65 shows that the process relies on social influence driven by the influence of presumed influence (i.e., an individual’s perception that a message strongly influences others and consequently impacts his/her own reactions to the message (Noguti, & Russell, 2014)). Implications for the promotion of well-being behaviors are discussed.

Around the world, debates about the need to regulate bloggers’ activities when they promote branded content arise. Some countries have decided to impose disclosure. Yet, disclosure by a third party and celebrities’ self-disclosure have been shown to reduce influencers’ effectiveness (Boerman, Willemsen, & Van Der Aa, 2017; Colliander & Erlandsson, 2015). Social Media Influencers (SMI) such as bloggers are therefore reluctant to disclose the sponsored nature of their posts, as in other contexts, it has been shown to reduce effectiveness (Charry & Tessitore, 2014). Furthermore, controls that would enforce compliance seems very complex to implement, particularly in a global media environment in which not all countries apply the same regulations. Through a between-subjects experiment (N=139), we explore whether self-imposed disclosure may be an effective and appropriate alternative to regulations. Interestingly, results indicate that although self-disclosure may indeed negatively impact the attitude towards the recommended brand, intentions to buy are not impacted. Followers’ perceptions of the SMI’s motivations explain these results. Self-disclosure restores trust and in turn, followers’ intentions to adopt the SMI’s recommendations. It may therefore be SMI’s most effective response and in their best interest to disclose, to maintain their influence while increasing their followers’ literacy, hence, empowerment. Beyond offering guidance for SMIs, this study therefore provides recommendations to public policy makers.

In this paper, we study the effectiveness of social labeling as a technique to promote pro-environmental behaviors in children, and examine more specifically the potential moderating effect of children’s age. We run an experiment on a sample of 115 3rd to 6th grade children and show that 1/ children exposed to a social labeling actually declare more pro-environmental behaviors and that 2/ children at an intermediate age (between 9 years and a half and 11 years and a half) are the most responsive to the technique, underlying an inverted-U relationship between social labeling effectiveness and children's age. These results contribute to a better theoretical understanding of social labeling mechanisms and suggest implications for public policy makers.