Exploring Consumers’ Interpretation of Contested Nutritional Evidence: The Relevance of the Moral Foundations Theory

This chapter develops a conceptual framework to analyze consumers’ decision-making about healthy eating when the scientific basis concerning the healthiness of food is perceived as weak. It establishes a new theoretical approach using the example of superfoods. “Superfood” is a marketing term used to promote foods for their exceptional nutritional characteristics held to be beneficial for health. The chapter builds on the observation that nutritional science is a comparatively young science that is often criticized for methodological weaknesses and the involvement of the food industry. This context affords an exemplary opportunity to study the role of alternative evidence practices challenging the use of scientific evidence as a foundation for consumers’ decisions. The traditional rational model of consumer decision-making may not be appropriate for studying consumer choices in this context. Instead, a psychological model taking into account the cognitive limitations in consumers’ decision-making is needed. Pelli and Roosen highlight the importance of moral foundations theory in the investigation of consumers’ interpretation of contested nutritional evidence. In their chapter, the authors show that this theory offers a valuable framework and conceptualize a model that establishes testable hypotheses on the role of moral foundations in the interpretation of nutritional evidence.