The effect of value-added labels on consumer acceptance, purchase intention, and willingness to pay for chicken breast bites

• Animal welfare processing labels are accepted similar to common value-added labels • U.S. poultry consumers prioritize quality and price at time of purchase over labels • Consumers are unwilling to pay more for value-added labels on chicken breast bites • Knowledge levels influence acceptance, but do not influence willingness to pay The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of the “Humanely Processed” label on consumer acceptance, purchase intention, and willingness to pay (WTP) compared to common labels found in the market, such as “All-Natural” and “USDA Organic.” Regular chicken consumers (n=116) evaluated identical chicken breast bite samples with one of the three claims or no claim (control), and doctored samples were included to prevent learning effect. They were asked to read the label and evaluate overall liking, attribute liking (appearance, texture, and chicken flavor), purchase intention, and WTP. No significant differences were found amongst claims in acceptance and purchase intention. Segmentation based on animal welfare (AW) and labeling knowledge revealed significant differences amongst all labels except Humanely Processed in overall liking, flavor liking, and purchase intention ( P < 0.05). Also, it was found that participants were not willing to pay above market average ($8.50). This study indicates that the “Humanely Processed” label has no greater influence on consumers acceptance, purchase intention, and WTP compared to other labels, suggesting consumers are WTP for AW labels at an appropriate price level.