Most German parents say they understand and use food labels, survey finds

A large online survey of parents in Germany has found that most report understanding and using three food labelling formats: the colour-coded Nutri-Score, the Nutrition Information Panel (NIP) and the list of ingredients. The cross-sectional study, published in BMC Public Health, surveyed 978 parents who are responsible for at least half of their household’s food shopping and who live with children under 18 years of age. Participants completed an online questionnaire covering their subjective understanding of each label format, how often they used it, why they did not use it, and how they judged its effectiveness.

Subjective understanding was high across all three formats. 84.8 percent of parents said they understood the Nutri-Score, 83.7 percent said they understood the NIP, and 80.5 percent said they understood the ingredients list. Nearly three quarters of respondents, 73.7 percent, reported subjective understanding of all three formats at once.

Reported use followed a similar pattern. 70.3 percent of parents said they used the Nutri-Score, 74.2 percent used the NIP, and 70.6 percent used the ingredients list, with 58.8 percent reporting use of all three. The NIP was the most frequently used format, although the differences between formats were modest.

The researchers note that these figures describe self-reported behaviour in a quota-based sample rather than objectively observed shopping behaviour, and that the sample was recruited to approximate but not exactly mirror the distribution of parents in Germany by household income and municipality size. To identify which characteristics were associated with understanding and use, the team conducted multivariable logistic regression analyses. Two psychological factors emerged consistently.

Parents who held stronger beliefs in the effectiveness of healthy eating were more likely to both understand and use the labels, whereas parents who reported higher perceived overload from nutrition information were less likely to do so. This pattern held across the labelling formats examined, suggesting that the same underlying attitudes shape engagement with front-of-pack and back-of-pack information alike. Sex differences also appeared in the data.

Men were less likely than women to report subjective understanding or use of the NIP and the ingredients list. The authors caution that these are cross-sectional associations, so the direction of the relationships between beliefs, overload and label use cannot be established from this study. When parents who did not use a particular format were asked why, lack of interest was the most frequently reported reason across all three labels.

The researchers also compared evaluative judgements across the formats using generalized estimating equations, a statistical approach that accounts for the fact that each participant rated all three labels. That comparison produced a nuanced picture of how parents perceive each format. More participants agreed that the Nutri-Score was easy to use, whereas more participants agreed that they understood the information provided by the NIP, indicating that the detailed nutrient table is perceived as interpretable by those who consult it.

In other words, ease of use and comprehensibility appear to be judged along different dimensions, and the two formats scored highest on different ones. The authors conclude that a high proportion of German parents in this quota-based sample reported subjective understanding and use of multiple food labelling formats, and that subjective understanding and use were consistently associated with beliefs about the effectiveness of healthy eating and with perceived nutrition information overload. They state that these findings may help inform future public health communication on food labelling.

Because the study is cross-sectional and self-reported, it cannot show whether label use actually changes purchasing decisions or diets, and the published version is an early-access article subject to further editorial edits before the final version of record appears.

Subject of Research: Parents' self-reported understanding and use of food labelling formats in Germany

Article Title: Parents’ subjective understanding, use, reasons for non-use and perceived effectiveness of food labelling formats in Germany: a cross-sectional study of the Nutri-score, nutrition information panel and ingredients list

Article References: Simmet, A., Ehret, J., Agyapong, N. A. F., & Stroebele-Benschop, N. (2026). Parents’ subjective understanding, use, reasons for non-use and perceived effectiveness of food labelling formats in Germany: a cross-sectional study of the Nutri-score, nutrition information panel and ingredients list. BMC Public Health, 26(1), Article 2696. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-026-29571-8

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12889-026-29571-8

Keywords: Nutri-Score, food labelling, Nutrition Information Panel, ingredients list, parents, Germany, cross-sectional study, public health nutrition, consumer behaviour, nutrition information overload, subjective, understanding