|
The World Food Policy Center (WFPC) within the Sanford School of Public Policy is implementing a pilot project in the 2026 spring semester focused on consumer understandings of “ultra-processed foods” (UPFs). The goal will be to quantify how US adults understand and apply the term UPF. We will test whether alternative short framings or cues improve comprehension and classification accuracy. Framing The increasing consumption of harmful commodities, including tobacco, alcohol, and unhealthy foods, is a major driver of the global burden of non-communicable diseases. Among unhealthy foods, there is accumulating evidence that UPFs are associated with poor diet quality and elevated risks of cardiometabolic disease and mortality. Despite their widespread consumption, public understanding of what constitutes a UPF remains limited. This literature raises the possibility that “UPF” may be a policy-relevant construct but not necessarily an effective public-facing communication tool unless it is translated into language and cues that consumers can consistently apply. Understanding public perceptions of UPFs is important because policies are more likely to have public support and behavioral impact if the public understands the rationale behind them and perceives them as beneficial. The US currently lacks rigorous, large-scale evidence on how consumers understand UPFs, what heuristics they use in everyday classification, and which brief plain-language descriptions reduce misunderstanding. This pilot will quantify how US adults interpret and apply the UPF concept to common foods, then use a randomized framing experiment to test which plain-language description produces the most accurate and consistent classification. Research Questions · How do US adults define UPFs? What cues do they rely on to identify UPFs? · Which brief plain-language descriptions of UPFs most clearly convey the concept and improve classification accuracy? · Which constraints and beliefs predict misunderstanding, uncertainty, and misclassification? |