Consumers misunderstand 'cruelty-free' labeled products, researchers find

March 28, 2012

Based on a recent study, University of Missouri and Oregon researchers believe a legal definition for what constitutes "cruelty-free" labeled products should be determined and manufacturers should be required to abide by the legal use of the label. Many consumers intentionally buy products manufactured in ways that do not exploit child labor or cause minimal harm to animals or the environment. Many businesses, such as shampoo, cosmetic, fragrance and pharmaceutical companies, use the term cruelty-free to attract buyers, giving consumers the impression that no animal testing was used while manufacturing and testing the products. However, that is not always the case.

"Because there is no legal standard for what is and isn't cruelty-free, consumers are vulnerable to deceptive advertising," said Joonghwa Lee, a at the University of Missouri School of Journalism. "A company may claim their product is cruelty-free, but there still may be some done somewhere along the . This could lead to consumers being tricked into buying that they do not support."

During the study, Lee and lead author Kim Sheehan, a professor in the University of Oregon School of Journalism and Communication, conducted an asking participants about their knowledge of cruelty-free labeled products. The participants were then given information from a New York Times article describing the ambiguous nature of cruelty-free labeled products.

"Participants in our study who recognized the term cruelty-free indicated that they would be more likely to buy products that were cruelty-free and they had much more toward brands that advertised themselves as cruelty-free," Lee said. "However, once the participants learned the wide range of definitions that exist for cruelty-free products, they found using the cruelty-free designation to be less socially responsible and less safe than they did before learning that information."

Sheehan and Lee say their findings are concerning in regard to consumer protection. They say that because they have shown that consumers are willing to spend money on products that are cruelty-free, even if they don't understand that those products aren't always completely free of animal testing, the door is opened for product unethical business and advertising practices. Sheehan and Lee believe there should be a legal definition for what constitutes a cruelty-free product to help protect consumers.

"Our study shows that consumers rely on their own personal moral values to make decisions," Sheehan said. "If the product information consumers receive is misleading, then they are not able to make important decisions in ways that they would consider morally correct. Creating a legal standard to define terms like cruelty-free will aid consumers in making the best decisions for themselves and their families."

Explore further: Freescale launches 'Cable-Free USB' initiative for wireless connectivity

More information: This study was presented at the American Academy of Advertising 2012 Annual Conference.

Related Stories

Recommended for you

The hand and foot of Homo naledi

October 6, 2015

The second set of papers related to the remarkable discovery of Homo naledi, a new species of human relative, have been published in scientific journal, Nature Communications, on Tuesday, 6 October 2015.

Who you gonna trust? How power affects our faith in others

October 6, 2015

One of the ongoing themes of the current presidential campaign is that Americans are becoming increasingly distrustful of those who walk the corridors of power – Exhibit A being the Republican presidential primary, in which ...

The dark side of Nobel prizewinning research

October 4, 2015

Think of the Nobel prizes and you think of groundbreaking research bettering mankind, but the awards have also honoured some quite unhumanitarian inventions such as chemical weapons, DDT and lobotomies.

How much for that Nobel prize in the window?

October 3, 2015

No need to make peace in the Middle East, resolve one of science's great mysteries or pen a masterpiece: the easiest way to get yourself a Nobel prize may be to buy one.

1 comment

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

not rated yet Mar 28, 2012
"This cruelty free banana tastes so much better than the regular banana" just cut the banana in half and labeled on half "cruelty free?"

There are only three things that I moderately trust on the packaging. The name, the nutrition, and the ingredients. And even those things are not always reliable.

Unless the government holds a company legally liable to the truth (like listing correct nutritional values) then a company will say anything it wants, with no regard to what it should mean.

IF you are so concerned with this aspect or that aspect of your product, you should research the product yourself, instead of sheeping your way along, believing every big red word on the box.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.