국내 육가공품의 영양표시 현황과 소비자 인지도 및 소비경향 실태조사
김지혜, 이근택
Abstract
김지혜, 이근택
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to investigate current nutrition labeling status, levels of recognition and patterns of consumption of domestically processed meat products. The survey results show that 47.4% of products (81 out of 171) were labeled with nutrition information. Where general product labeling and nutrition labeling were provided, it was read by 84.9% and 66.8% of the survey subjects, respectively. The most common reasons for not reading product labeling were ‘hard to understand it’ (46.2%) and ‘not concerned’ (30.8%). This was attributed to respondents finding it ‘useless’ (39.3%) and ‘hard to understand the nutrition contents’ (32.8%). As for the positive effect of enforcing a nutrition labeling system, 62% of respondents affirmed ‘ease of selecting products which are good for health’. The reading of general product labeling showed a significant positive correlation (p<0.01) with the reading of nutrition labeling. The amount the nutrition labeling was read showed a negative correlation (p<0.05) with comprehension of the information on the nutrition labeling contained. Therefore, providing more information on the nutrition labeling for the consumers of processed meat products and also educating them more comprehensively about the nutrition, which would ultimately help them improve their dietary life, is needed.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The purpose of this study is to investigate current nutrition labeling status, levels of recognition and patterns of consumption of domestically processed meat products. The survey results show that 47.4% of products (81 out of 171) were labeled with nutrition information. Where general product labeling and nutrition labeling were provided, it was read by 84.9% and 66.8% of the survey subjects, respectively. The most common reasons for not reading product labeling were ‘hard to understand it’ (46.2%) and ‘not concerned’ (30.8%). This was attributed to respondents finding it ‘useless’ (39.3%) and ‘hard to understand the nutrition contents’ (32.8%). As for the positive effect of enforcing a nutrition labeling system, 62% of respondents affirmed ‘ease of selecting products which are good for health’. The reading of general product labeling showed a significant positive correlation (p<0.01) with the reading of nutrition labeling. The amount the nutrition labeling was read showed a negative correlation (p<0.05) with comprehension of the information on the nutrition labeling contained. Therefore, providing more information on the nutrition labeling for the consumers of processed meat products and also educating them more comprehensively about the nutrition, which would ultimately help them improve their dietary life, is needed.
Key concepts: Nutrition Labeling, Nutrition facts label, Nutrition information, Food labeling, Reading (process), Product (mathematics), Comprehension, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey