Natural Claims on Sugary Fruit Drinks: A Randomized Experiment With U.S. Parents

Natural claims on food are largely unregulated in the U.S. This study examined the effects of natural claims on a fruit-flavored drink with added sugar (i.e., fruit drink).

In 2019, U.S. parents of children aged 2-12 years (N=1,078) recruited from an online survey panel were randomized to one of three arms: natural claim on a fruit drink, 100% all-natural claim, or a no-claim control. Parents reported their intentions and perceptions regarding fruit drinks using 1-5 response scales. Analysis occurred in 2022-2023.

Both natural claims led parents to have higher intentions to purchase a fruit drink for their child than the control (average differential effect=0.20-0.24, both p<0.05). The natural claim (but not the 100% all-natural claim) also led parents to think that the fruit drink was healthier for their children (average differential effect=0.22, p=0.024). Claims made parents less likely to think that the drink contained added sugar (average differential effect= -0.08 to -0.12, both p<0.05) and led to lower estimated amounts of added sugar in teaspoons (average differential effect= -1.77 to -2.09, both p<0.05). Mediation analyses revealed that the claims led to higher intentions to purchase the fruit drink by increasing perceived healthfulness of the fruit drink and by leading parents to believe that there was no added sugar in the fruit drink.

Natural claims could increase interest in and perceived healthfulness of fruit drinks. Misperceptions about the nutritional content caused by claims appear to be driving greater purchase intentions. These findings suggest a need for stronger regulation around natural claims to prevent consumer misunderstanding.