Summary labels are more effective

Ducrot et al. (2015a, 2015b);

Egnell et al. (2018a, 2018b)

Summary labels are easier to decode and more suitable for capturing attention thanks to the use of colour

Ducrot et al. (2015a, 2015b);

Talati et al. (2019);

Hersey et al. (2013);

Aschemann-Witzel et al. (2013) 

The NS (summary label) enhance participants’ ability to identify the healthiness of foods and drinks more than the MTL (nutrient-specific label), which is considered the most informative FOPL

Packer et al. (2021) 

NS (summary label) achieves very positive results in terms of understanding and ability to allow respondents to rank food products in terms of nutritional quality

Ares et al. (2018);

Egnell et al. (2018b);

Finkelstein et al. (2018);

Talati et al. (2019);

Dréano-Trécant et al. (2020) 

Nutrient-specific labels are preferred because the completeness and specificity of the information allow consumers to better define nutritional values

Hersey et al. (2013) 

The summary labels make it easier to estimate the healthiness of a product, meeting the needs of consumers who have limited processing time and who are required to make a quick decision process

Hersey et al., 2013;

De la Cruz-Góngora et al. (2017) 

Consumers in multiple EU countries show preference for a richer and more informative label like the NiB (nutrient-specific label), compared to the NS (summary label)

Mazzù et al. (2020, 2021a)