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

Mar 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: Study finds law dramatically curbing need for speed

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

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Buying 'legal highs' from the Internet is a risky business

May 20, 2011

Many drugs sold as 'legal highs' on the internet do not contain the ingredients they claim. Some instead contain controlled substances and are illegal to sell over the internet. These are findings of Dr. Mark Baron, who bought ...

Recommended for you

Study finds law dramatically curbing need for speed

Apr 18, 2014

Almost seven years have passed since Ontario's street-racing legislation hit the books and, according to one Western researcher, it has succeeded in putting the brakes on the number of convictions and, more importantly, injuries ...

Newlyweds, be careful what you wish for

Apr 17, 2014

A statistical analysis of the gift "fulfillments" at several hundred online wedding gift registries suggests that wedding guests are caught between a rock and a hard place when it comes to buying an appropriate gift for the ...

Can new understanding avert tragedy?

Apr 17, 2014

As a boy growing up in Syracuse, NY, Sol Hsiang ran an experiment for a school project testing whether plants grow better sprinkled with water vs orange juice. Today, 20 years later, he applies complex statistical ...

Creative activities outside work can improve job performance

Apr 16, 2014

Employees who pursue creative activities outside of work may find that these activities boost their performance on the job, according to a new study by San Francisco State University organizational psychologist Kevin Eschleman ...

User comments : 1

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

that_guy
not rated yet Mar 28, 2012
"This cruelty free banana tastes so much better than the regular banana"

Oh...you 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.

More news stories

Clippers and coiners in 16th-century England

In 2017 a new £1 coin will appear in our pockets with a design extremely difficult to forge. In the mid-16th century, Elizabeth I's government came up with a series of measures to deter "divers evil persons" ...

Airbnb rental site raises $450 mn

Online lodging listings website Airbnb inked a $450 million funding deal with investors led by TPG, a source close to the matter said Friday.

Health care site flagged in Heartbleed review

People with accounts on the enrollment website for President Barack Obama's signature health care law are being told to change their passwords following an administration-wide review of the government's vulnerability to the ...