Expert Voices N°3

EXPERT VOICES

▶ Slow speedy shoppers with bespoke flooring- Nico HEUVINCK ▶ Honor, face, and dignity cultures at the negotiation table - Jimena RAMIREZ-MARIN & JingJing YAO ▶ CSR communication: What is the impact for companies facing future allegations of social irresponsibility? Catherine JANSSEN ▶ How can retailers increase the adoption of in-store mobile payment? - Gwarlann DE KERVILER & Nathalie DEMOULIN ▶ Food deprivation increases the health halo effect - Romain CADARIO

SLOW SPEEDY SHOPPERS WITH BESPOKE FLOORING Based on an interview with Nico HEUVINCK on his paper “Altering speed of locomotion” coauthored with Bram VAN DEN BERGH, Gaby A. C. SCHELLEKENS and Iris VERMEIR (Journal of Consumer Research, 2016).

New research by Nico HEUVINCK and his coauthors explores how retailers could have the power to modulate our walking speed in shops. It seems that changing the distances between lines on the floor can tap into subconscious desires to reach the end of shopping aisles: the closer the end appears, the faster we walk towards the goal.

Retailers employ different techniques to moderate in-store customer traffic. The most common of these is music.

Playing different tempo music can alter shopper walking speed, but what if you wanted consumers to walk at different speeds in different aisles of the shop? Professor Nico HEUVINCK explains, “As a retailer, you might want to slow shoppers down in aisles containing high profit margin products, so they have more time to see the products and in-store advertising”.

He adds, “In other areas, like the store entrance, you will want to promote swift movement of customers to avoid congestion, crowding and consumer irritation. It has been shown that people spend less time in crowded retail spaces.”

Animal instincts HEUVINCK and coauthors based their experiments on goal gradient theory. This was first developed in the 1930’s, to see what happened to the speed of a rat when it gets close to a goal: the cheese at the end of a runway. The rats were trained to know where the cheese was, and, by dividing the rats’ paths into equal segments, it was observed that a rat would move faster when it got closer to the cheese. This is thought to come down to motivation; when a rat gets closer to the goal, it is more motivated to reach it and moves faster.

The big question for Heuvinck was, “Will humans respond to distance change, and perceived distance change, in the same way as rats?” And, in turn, how much are we influenced by automatic rather than deliberate processes?

Humans and the goal gradient effect “The literature shows us that humans are influenced by the goal gradient effect,” he explains. “Coffee shop loyalty programs have us collecting stamps with the goal of getting a free coffee once we have ten stamps. Initially, there is no hurry to get the stamps. But, when you get closer to the tenth stamp, it has been shown that consumers purchasing speed increases.”

BIOGRAPHY Nico HEUVINCK is Assistant Professor in Marketing at IÉSEG. He received his PhD in Marketing and Applied Economic Sciences from the University of Ghent in Belgium. His research focuses on attitude theory, consumer behavior, judgment and decision-making, nostalgia, and store atmospherics.

The team wanted to see if humans also respond to physical markers that would influence their subconscious desire to reach a goal: the end of a shopping aisle.

Longer aisle, slower shopping By making thousands of observations of shoppers in both the lab and in real retail settings, HEUVINCK and colleagues were able to map their walking speeds. They altered distance between lines of tape on the floor of an aisle and conducted surveys related to object recognition.

Influencing walking speed in a retail environment could lead to changes in sales patterns. “Retailers are interested in increasing sales and the work needs to be developed to provide a link between walking speed influenced by floor pattern, and retail sales,” concludes HEUVINCK. He also notes, however, that shoppers are influenced by a number of external factors when they come to make a purchase, and proving this correlation could be difficult.

They found that when lines were closer together, consumer perception was that the end of the aisle was further away, and they walked slower. This is when their recognition was also best. “The results are very robust and we saw significant influence on walking speed time and again,” HEUVINCK adds.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

METHODOLOGY HEUVINCK and coauthors made over 4000 observations of shoppers, both in-store and in a lab. They altered markers on the floor to alter the perception of aisle length and thereby modulate human speeds when walking down shopping aisles (altering the distance between markers alters an individual’s perception of the distance to the end goal).

The team relates their findings to goal gradient theory: when an individual is closer to their goal (the end of the aisle), they will walk faster to reach it. Meanwhile, participant surveys revealed that slower walking makes shoppers more observant.

“Retailers can use our findings to moderate walking speeds in different areas of a retail space,” HEUVINCK notes.

“They could use different sized tiles or parquet, or make intermediate flooring sections to break up floor spaces.

Although we focused on flooring, we think the effect will be seen if walking paths are divided by partitioning the wall or ceiling, by altering shelf length or distance between lighting fixtures. Partitioning has the potential to influence shopping patterns and drive up sales”.

He adds that this work is not just limited to retail: “There are potential applications for speed influencing floor patterns in any space where you want to moderate the flow of people. These include busy public spaces such as museums, train stations and airports.”

HONOR, FACE, AND DIGNITY CULTURES AT THE NEGOTIATION TABLE Based on an interview with Jimena RAMIREZ-MARIN and Jingjing YAO and their article “Dignity, face, honor cultures: A study of negotiation strategy and outcomes in three cultures” by Soroush ASLANI et al. (Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2016).

Professors Jimena RAMIREZ-MARIN and JingJing YAO conducted a 2016 comparative study of negotiating a new business relationship in three different cultures: honor (Qatar), face (China), and dignity (the USA).

Their findings can be used to increase value creation at negotiation tables around the world.

idea of yourself. In honor culture, there is a strong emphasis on protecting your family and on your reputation. Your sense of self-worth is reflected externally in the eyes of others. I like to say to my students that in an honor culture, an “A” is not an “A” until your mother sees it,” explains RAMIREZMARIN.

The study addresses some of the gaps in cross-cultural negotiation research literature, such as the lack of study of negotiation behaviors in Middle Eastern cultures as well as the contradiction between traditional theories and growing empirical evidence around actual negotiation strategies and outcomes in East Asia.

“Face culture is similar to honor culture in that you build your sense of self through the eyes of others, but the emphasis is on humility, respect, and harmony. In contrast to both honor and face cultures, however, in dignity cultures more importance is placed on the individual than on society. You make decisions on your own, autonomously.”

“We chose Qatar, China, and the USA based on their representativeness of each cultural type (honor, face, and dignity respectively), their accessibility, and their economic importance,” explains Professor Jimena RAMIREZ-MARIN. In other words, negotiators from around the world can use this study’s findings to inform their strategies when sitting down at the negotiation table with people from each of the following three cultural types: honor (the Middle East and Latin America); face (East Asia); and dignity (Northwest Europe and the Anglosphere).

Three cultures: honor, face, and dignity Building on traditional theories, the study arrives at a new theoretical framework for honor, face, and dignity cultures.

“For all three, it is about self-worth, or how you build your

These key differences were found to strongly impact negotiation strategies and outcomes. “What our study shows is that it’s not always just monetary drives that shape negotiation strategies and outcomes. In face and honor cultures, people’s self-worth is more at stake at the negotiation table than it is for people from dignity cultures, so it becomes part of the exchange in addition to whatever negotiation issue is at stake.”

BIOGRAPHIES

Jimena RAMIREZ-MARIN is Assistant Professor in International Negotiation at IÉSEG. She obtained her PhD in Work and Organizational Psychology from the University of Seville.

JingJing YAO is Assistant Professor of International Negotiation at IÉSEG. He obtained his PhD in Organization Management at Peking University.

Different cultures, different negotiation strategies Contrary to what traditional theory predicts, the study found that negotiators from both face and honor cultures adopted more competitive, less collaborative, strategies than negotiators from dignity cultures did.

Notably, negotiators from these cultures engaged in less information sharing, which is key to gaining insights into each other’s interests, and so they achieved less equally distributed gains and created less value overall than dignity culture negotiators. “It goes against traditional collectivistindividualist cultural theory that the Americans were more collaborative than either the Qataris or Chinese,” explains RAMIREZ-MARIN.

only recognizable outcome may be win-lose, because of the importance of establishing the hierarchical dynamic in a new relationship.”

By contrast, in dignity cultures, the starting assumption in negotiating a new business relationship is that the two parties are equals, which makes them more likely to adopt collaborative strategies such as information sharing.

YAO elaborates: “Having grown up in China, I can confirm that the reality is different than traditional collectivist theories predict. It may be true that collaboration, respect, and harmony are sought between friends and family, but when negotiating new business relationships you in fact see more aggressive behaviors. We couldn’t solve this problem with new theory until we collected the data, which our study does.”

Does everyone want a win-win solution?

“It’s not just about being competitive: it’s about the mindset,” says RAMIREZ-MARIN. YAO explains: “Americans achieved more equally distributed gains and created more value overall because they entered the negotiation seeking to achieve a win-win outcome, but win-win outcomes are not always recognized in other cultures. When negotiating a new business relationship in a face or honor culture, the

METHODOLOGY The researchers collected data via face-to-face negotiation simulations with undergraduate students in the social sciences and humanities from prestigious universities in three nations selected to serve as exemplars of honor, face, and dignity cultures, respectively Qatar, China, and the USA. The researchers explain that the prototype model that they used in fact enabled them to move away from stereotypes. As RAMIREZ-MARIN explains, “It’s about identifying the central tendency in each culture, but there is always variation around the mean.”

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS As their study states: “An important practical implication of this research is that highly competitive interaction should be anticipated when negotiators from face or honor cultures are at the table, at least when negotiating new business relationships. Accordingly, negotiators can plan their approach and use of strategy in anticipation of likely competitive behaviors. For example, negotiators may take extra time to develop a trusting relationship with their face or honor culture counterpart before they begin to discuss the structure of the new business relationship.”

Indeed, RAMIREZ-MARIN emphasizes the importance to value creation of finding ways to decrease competitiveness in negotiations with people from face and honor cultures, and the importance of using their study as well as further research to inform the strategies that negotiators adopt around the world: “Another study found that honor culture negotiators are actually more generous than dignity culture negotiators when they do not feel threatened,” she says. “By continuing to study how cultural norms shape negotiation behaviors, we can better identify the factors that will improve outcomes. Negotiators can use the findings from research such as ours to inform the strategies that they adopt in negotiations to create more value and build more strategic, successful relationships over the long term.”

CSR COMMUNICATION: WHAT IS THE IMPACT FOR COMPANIES FACING FUTURE ALLEGATIONS OF SOCIAL IRRESPONSIBILITY? Based on an interview with Catherine JANSSEN on her paper “Playing with fire: aggravating and buffering effects of ex ante CSR communication campaigns for companies facing allegations of social irresponsibility” co-authored with Joëlle VANHAMME, Valérie SWAEN and Guido BERENS (Marketing Letters 2015).

Can a company’s previous communication about its CSR (corporate social responsibility) activities reduce the fallout from future accusations of social irresponsibility? This new research reveals that prior CSR communication can buffer the ill effects of future negative press. However, detrimental effects are seen when early communications come from independent external sources.

Companies increasingly communicate their corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities. This is thought to help consumers see them in a positive light. But, do these communications do anything to temper negative consumer attitudes towards a company accused of social irresponsibility? “There are competing schools of thought when it comes to assessing the effect of CSR communications of companies facing allegations of social irresponsibility,” Catherine JANSSEN explains. “On one side it is thought that a company’s prior CSR communications can protect it when in crisis. But on the other, it is thought to have an aggravating effect on consumer attitudes.”

Communication source plays a vital role When it comes to how companies communicate, or market themselves, they may choose to do this in a way that does, or does not, highlight their CSR activities.

Information about companies can also often come from third party, independent sources. JANSSEN and coauthors looked at whether companies’ communications

about their CSR activities could potentially influence and mitigate the effects of any future allegations of social irresponsibility.

“Specifically, we wanted to understand the role of the communication source,” she explains. “Generally, third party reports on company CSR activities are perceived to be more credible than when a company communicates its own activities, as consumers do not activate their ‘persuasion knowledge’ - their awareness of company marketing tactics to sway and persuade”. And she adds, “We wanted to see if this is reflected in consumer attitudes towards companies accused of social irresponsibility”.

A variable study JANSSEN and co-authors carried out a web-based survey that presented participants with a number of scenarios related to a fictitious company, devised to avoid opinion bias based on prior knowledge of an existing company.

Background information on the company either included, or did not include, information related to its CSR practices; and came either from the company or a third party.

Participants were then shown a news article related to an allegation of social irresponsibility by the company in a different CSR domain. “The participants may have been shown background information about the company’s positive environmental work, followed by an accusation that they are outsourcing a cheap workforce” explains JANSSEN. A minimum of 30 participants were presented

BIOGRAPHY

Catherine JANSSEN is Assistant Professor in Marketing at IÉSEG. She received her PhD in Management Sciences from the Louvain School of Management of the Catholic University of Louvain. Her research focuses on consumer responses to corporate social responsibility, corporate crises and corporate social irresponsibility and their marketing implications, and consumers’ socially responsible behaviors. She is a member of the IÉSEG Center for Organizational Responsibility, ICOR, a cross-departmental academic center that coordinates the School’s different activities (teaching, research..) on corporate social responsibility, sustainability, ethics and social innovation.

with a given scenario and the same key variables of interest were measured after all scenarios.

“We can explain this through our understanding of persuasion knowledge,” JANSSEN explains.

“The main variable was consumer attitude towards the company and we wanted to investigate the mechanism behind any change”.

“Consumers are aware that companies embellish claims when they communicate about their own CSR activities, and activate their persuasion knowledge prior to any negative allegations. When allegations of irresponsibility surface later, therefore, the shock is less due to the persuasion knowledge that is already linked to the initial communications.” However, because consumers see CSR communications from independent sources to be generally more credible, persuasion knowledge only gets activated when they learn about the allegations of social irresponsibility and, in that case, the allegations create a bigger shock, leading to stronger negative consumer responses.

Aggravating and buffering effects of CSR communication

In contrast to previous work, JANSSEN and co-authors’ survey and subsequent analysis allowed them to determine how change in consumer attitudes towards a company depends on the source of initial communication in the wake of irresponsibility allegations.

They also factored in consumer persuasion knowledge.

Results showed that when the initial CSR communication comes from the company itself, this acts as a buffer, reducing the impact of the allegations on consumer attitudes.

METHODOLOGY JANSSEN and co-authors conducted studies via a webbased survey of 743 adults, recruited via snowball sampling.

Those participating were presented with information about a fictitious company. This either included information about the company’s CSR activities, or did not; and was communicated either by the company or a third party. Participants were then presented with a news article reporting that that company had acted in a socially irresponsible way, in a CSR domain unrelated to the first communication. They answered questions related to their attitude towards the company either after the first, or after the first and second communication. The study also included questions that enabled participants’ persuasion knowledge to be measured through introduction of a bias scale. Janssen and co-authors then conducted an analysis of variance (ANOVA) on attitude towards the company.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS “Our findings might seem to be counterintuitive,” JANSSEN explains. “Consumers give more credit to CSR activities reported by third parties, so it would be a good idea to communicate through them.” But, she warns, the initial credibility of third-party communications will aggravate the shock of later allegations of irresponsibility, if they surface, and thus result in stronger negative consumer responses. “When companies address their CSR communication strategy, they must consider the risk of being accused of social irresponsibility, in any domain, in the future,” JANSSEN stresses.

“Consumers do give more credit to CSR activities reported by third parties, but our results show that a company needs to beware of any ‘skeletons in the closet’ if it chooses to communicate via independent sources”. She gives the example, “Let’s say a third party reports on a company’s environmental CSR strategy, but then it is later accused of irresponsible behavior, even in a totally unrelated domain such as employee working conditions, the early CSR communication will not mitigate the ill effects of the allegations”. And concludes, “This should be something companies consider when designing their CSR communication strategy”.

HOW CAN RETAILERS INCREASE THE ADOPTION OF IN-STORE MOBILE PAYMENT? Based on an interview with Gwarlann DE KERVILER and Nathalie T.M. DEMOULIN and their article “Adoption of in-store mobile payment: Are perceived risk and convenience the only drivers?” coauthored with Pietro ZIDDA (Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 2016).

Smartphones are revolutionizing retailing, with shoppers using their mobile devices to search for information about products, compare prices and ask friends’ advice.

On the other hand, however, consumers have yet to adopt mobile payment services very enthusiastically.

This study looks at the drivers for this behavior and offers practical recommendations to retailers.

friends for their opinions. And yet, only a small percentage of these individuals also use available mobile payment services.

Retailers such as Best Buy and Macy’s and smartphone manufacturers such as Samsung and Apple — which offer mobile payment systems — would obviously like to change this state of affairs.

“Why are consumers not using smartphones for payment when they are using them for many other things?” DE KERVILER asked. “That was the starting point.”

Benefit-risk analysis: pleasure is important The study’s researchers sought to determine the perceived utilitarian, hedonic and social benefits, as well as the perceived financial and privacy risks that drive the adoption of mobile payment services.

Almost 80 percent of U.S. smartphone users are also mobile shoppers, which means they use their mobile devices to check on prices and discounts, search for product information and reviews, compare product features and ask

“One surprising finding was that the hedonic benefits [for the use of mobile payment] were pretty high,” said DE KERVILER, “meaning that the pleasure of the experience was seen as very important by consumers.”

BIOGRAPHIES Gwarlann DE KERVILER joined IÉSEG in 2013 and is an associate professor of marketing and the Academic Director of the IÉSEG International MBA. She holds a PhD from the University of Paris Dauphine.

Nathalie DEMOULIN has been an associate professor of marketing at IÉSEG since 2001.

She holds a PhD from the Catholic University of Louvain, Belgium, where she researched the decision-making of marketing managers.

How is paying for merchandise with a smartphone fun or enjoyable? DEMOULIN speculates that it is “hedonic due to its novelty. If we compare mobile payment and information search, we see that enjoyment and social benefits have a higher influence on mobile payment than on information search.”

Respondents may have also felt that the use of a new technology makes a good impression on others, thus offering social benefits.

Practical concerns are important too Also on the plus side, respondents perceived utilitarian benefits to in-store mobile payment that would make transactions easier. However, some were still preoccupied by perceived risks to privacy, such as the possibility that others might gain access to their bank accounts.

In addition, they were concerned about potential financial risk if the transaction did not proceed correctly.

If a customer has already used a smartphone in early stages of the buying process, the researchers established that there is a higher probability that they will use it for payment.

So their word to the wise retailer: “It’s important to create a relationship with customers when they’re searching for information, and then create an easy, direct connection with a payment platform, so the customer will feel it is a seamless transition,” advised DE KERVILER.

Creating a seamless customer experience A unique aspect of the authors’ research compared to previous studies is that it sought to determine a “spillover” effect between the more common use of smartphones to search for product information and the adoption of in-store mobile payment.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS “Retailers first need to make sure that they communicate on the right benefits and risks,” said DE KERVILER. They should reassure customers about financial and privacy risks while promoting the experiential and hedonic benefits of in-store mobile payment.

They may do this by using mobile apps to communicate with customers early in the process to seamlessly lead to mobile payment.

METHODOLOGY The authors conducted an online scenario-based survey of 363 French smartphone owners who had made at least one online purchase in the previous year. The participants were told to imagine that they wanted to buy a digital camera, and then were asked about their intention to use their mobile phone at different points in the shopping process: before entering a store, in the store to find information about products, and finally for payment.

Participants were randomly assigned to answer questions about the benefits and risks of using a smartphone during one of the last two stages of the scenario.

New uses of geo-localization make it possible to communicate information and financial incentives to customers at earlier stages of the in-store experience and then, at the final purchasing stages, promote mobile payment solutions.

Other ways of making the buying process appealing include associating mobile payment with visual or aural interfaces that stimulate the senses. The use of mobile payment could give customers a more surprising experience, such as the possibility of playing a game, or offering information on how many points were earned for the store’s loyalty program. “Mobile technologies make it possible to find ways of creating some pleasure at a time (payment) not usually associated with pleasure,” notes DE KERVILER.

FOOD DEPRIVATION INCREASES THE HEALTH HALO EFFECT Based on an interview with Romain CADARIO on his paper “The impact of health claims and food deprivation levels on health risk perceptions of fast-food restaurants” (Social Science and Medicine 2016).

As new research by Romain CADARIO reveals, marketing health claims can lead consumers to underestimate the health risks associated with certain food products.

He also found that those who are food deprived are particularly susceptible to health claims due to lower dietary involvement. These findings call for public policy initiatives such as educational campaigns targeted at food insufficient individuals.

Health claims and fast-food restaurants

does not position itself as a healthy brand.

Considering the different health claims made by Subway and McDonald’s, Cadario asked 414 adult Americans to look at two images of sandwiches from the two restaurants. The Subway item was slightly more caloric than the McDonald’s (640 kcal vs. 600 kcal). Based on the images alone, participants estimated the health risk associated with each, in terms of the risk of causing obesity, diabetes and cardiac illnesses. In the same survey, he determined the participant’s level of food deprivation, based on the USDA Food Sufficiency Indicator.

As consumers, we all feel the effect of marketing and the branding of products. Food products branded as low calorie, low fat, or ‘healthy’ lead people to underestimate their caloric content, a phenomenon known as the “health halo effect.”

Obesity, linked with high-calorie diets, is an increasing societal concern and is particularly pronounced in individuals deprived of food. “Little is known about health risk perceptions, especially for people who suffer from food insufficiency,” Cadario writes. “In combining consumer psychology and public health research we can try to answer the question: Is the health halo bias more pronounced in food insufficient individuals?”

When asked to compare the number of calories in a soft drink with those in apple juice, a consumer will invariably say that the apple juice has fewer calories, when, in fact, the same volume of apple juice has more. This is an example of the health halo bias - the consumer thinks of the apple in the juice as being healthy, and so they underestimate its caloric content. In the USA, Subway and McDonald’s are examples of how branding and marketing can alter perceptions and intensify this bias among consumers. Subway markets itself as a healthy fastfood restaurant; for example, its advertisements often depict vegetables with the slogan ‘eat fresh’. Conversely, McDonald’s

BIOGRAPHY Romain CADARIO became Assistant Professor at IÉSEG in 2015. He received his PhD in Management Studies from Paris-Dauphine University in 2014 and then went on to complete a post-doctoral fellowship at ESSEC Business School. His research focuses on the impact of marketing communications on consumer behavior.

Health risk perceptions and the food insufficient Analysing the results of the survey, CADARIO found that consumers, food insufficient or not, perceive the Subway product to be a lower health risk. On a 9-point scale (with 9 being high health risk), this product demonstrates a mean value of ~ 5 when compared to the McDonald’s product, with a mean of ~ 7. Thus, Subway is a prime example of the health halo effect in action: it is a brand that makes health claims leading to consumer underestimation of the associated health risks. Results also show that this effect is more pronounced in food insufficient individuals. They perceive the mean health risk of eating a Subway sandwich to be 4.50, compared to 5.20 for the food sufficient individuals.

“For example, in France, preliminary results show that there is no difference in the perception of Subway and McDonald’s: they are both seen as fast-food and no bias towards the health effect is seen.”

“The results imply that those who do not suffer from food deprivation, who have higher incomes and are likely to be more educated, are more aware of what makes food healthy or unhealthy and are more critical of health claims.

These individuals see that McDonald’s and Subway are essentially the same. However, food deprived individuals are of low income, have lower education level and a lower level of dietary involvement, which makes them less critical of health claims and more responsive to marketing,” concludes CADARIO.

Future studies on a global scale CADARIO points out that the study has limitations in terms of its geographic location and the number of brands investigated. To come to a more general conclusion, future work aims to encompass more brands, other health claims, the impact on children vs. adults, and to investigate the effects in more countries. “In Europe, McDonald’s is marketed differently and so we may see a change in results,” he says.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC POLICY “Obesity is a great challenge for policy makers” stresses CADARIO. “These results show that food insufficient individuals are more responsive to marketing health claims and policy makers need to consider how this can be used ”.

METHODOLOGY Romain CADARIO conducted a web-based survey of 414 American adults. Consistent with previous research by Pierre CHANDON and Brian WANSINK, stimuli included sandwiches from two fast-food chains: Subway (presence of health claims) and McDonald’s (absence of health claims).

Respondents were asked to rate the health risks they perceived in terms of obesity, diabetes, and cardiac illnesses. Participants also answered questions as laid out by the USDA Food Insufficiency Indicator, which enabled Cadario to classify them as either food sufficient or food insufficient, which enabled him to determine the effect of food deprivation levels on their health halo bias.

He warns that financial support mechanisms to help those deprived of food, together with obligations to post the number of calories in food products, is not enough to stop individuals responding to marketing health claims.

“Governments need to help individuals better understand what they are eating, especially those that are food insufficient. This should be done from an early age through education initiatives in schools.”

He adds, “People need to learn how to critically examine marketing and how to pay attention to and understand nutritional information about food.”

Lille: 3 rue de la Digue – F-59000 Lille Paris: Socle de la Grande Arche – 1 Parvis de La Défense F-92044 Paris – La Défense cedex Switchboard: 03 20 54 58 92 / 01 55 91 10 10 www.ieseg.fr

@IESEGResearch