Table 2.

Mean ratings (range = 1–10, low–high) of labelling formats and overall effectiveness ranking (range = 1–4, most effective–least effective): adults (n 430) aged ≥18 years, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, November 2010–June 2011

	All conditions		Control (Nutrition Facts table)		Basic FOP label		Descriptive FOP label		Detailed TL label		Simple TL label
Dependent variable	Mean	sd	Mean	sd	Mean	sd	Mean	sd	Mean	sd	Mean	sd
Liking	6·6	2·6	6·9	2·4	6·2	2·7	6·4	2·9	7·2	2·5	6·5	2·5
Effectiveness	7·4	2·5	7·7	2·4	7·2	2·6	7·5	2·5	7·8	2·2	7·0	2·6
Understanding	8·2	2·2	8·2	2·1	7·8	2·3	8·4	2·1	8·7	1·9	8·1	2·3
Believability (n 429)	6·2	2·4	6·6	2·0	6·1	2·6	6·4	2·4	6·4	2·3	5·5	2·5
Mean effectiveness ranking	–	–	–	–	3·4	0·8	2·3	0·7	1·4	0·7	2·9	1·1

FOP, front-of-package; TL, Traffic Light.