ES-1

Modernizing Safe Handling and Ready-to-Eat/Not-Ready-toEat Labeling Instructions: Behavior Change Study

Executive Summary

August 23, 2020

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service (USDA, FSIS)

conducted a study to inform decisions about modernizing the Safe Handling Instructions 

(SHI) label and to provide information on consumers’ use and understanding of labeling on 

ready-to-eat (RTE) and not-ready-to-eat (NRTE) meat and poultry products. FSIS 

contracted with RTI International and its subcontractor North Carolina State University 

(NCSU) to conduct the study. 

▪ Phase I was a web-based experiment with a sample of U.S. consumers to select 

three variants of a revised SHI label (among 27 variants) that best attract 

participants’ attention. 

▪ Phase II was a behavior change study using a randomized experimental design 

with participant meal preparation and eye tracking in four geographic locations to 

evaluate whether any of the three revised SHI labels result in greater adherence 

to recommended safe handling instructions and greater visual salience to the SHI 

label on product packaging compared with the current SHI label.

▪ Phase III was a cost-benefit analysis to compare the value of the benefits from 

predicted reductions in foodborne illness (estimated using a predictive modeling 

approach) with the costs to industry to voluntarily update their product packaging 

to incorporate the revised SHI label.

The approach and findings for Phase II, the behavior change study, are summarized below.

ES.1 Study Approach

Participants in the behavior change study (n = 483) took part in the following three 

activities:

▪ An observational meal preparation experiment using mobile eye tracking in 

a test kitchen to determine whether any of the three revised labels result in 

greater adherence to recommended safe handling instructions compared with the 

current SHI label. Participants prepared a meal of two types of pasta and 

meatballs: meatballs made from scratch using fresh ground beef and packaged, 

frozen NRTE meatballs.

▪ An eye-tracking study using mock food packages to obtain quantitative data 

that measure the visual salience of participants’ attention to three revised SHI 

labels compared with the current SHI label. We also assessed participants’ ability 

to correctly distinguish between RTE and NRTE products.

▪ Post-interviews to collect information on participants’ awareness and use of the 

current SHI label and other information.
Modernizing Safe Handling and Ready-to-Eat/Not-Ready-to-Eat Labeling Instructions: Behavior 

Change Study

ES-2

Data collection took place in test kitchens located in four different locations (North Carolina, 

California, Texas, and Rhode Island).

ES.2 Findings and Conclusions

▪ The study findings suggest that the three revised SHI labels did not perform 

better than the current SHI label at encouraging participants’ overall adherence 

to the four safe handling instructions on the revised SHI labels (i.e., 

handwashing, cleaning and sanitizing, avoiding cross-contamination, and 

thermometer use). The label adherence scores were relatively low for the current 

SHI and the three revised SHI labels.

▪ Statistical analysis examining safe food handling behaviors individually indicate 

the experimental variant, Octagon-Long-Hybrid, was significantly better than the 

current SHI label at encouraging proper handwashing behavior, but did not 

influence other safe food handling behaviors.

▪ Based on statistical analysis of the eye-tracking data, there were no significant 

differences in visual salience (i.e., attention) between any of the three revised 

SHI labels tested and the current SHI label. 

▪ According to the eye-tracking data, attention to the SHI label is generally low, 

ranging from 1% to 38% of participants having any fixation on the SHI label, 

depending on the product viewed. For many of the products in the study, the rate 

of any fixation was higher for the manufacturer’s cooking instructions (MCI)

relative to the SHI label. The higher rate of fixation may be due to the MCI’s 

larger size on the package and use of more text,

▪ The study also examined the respective attention participants give to the SHI 

label and the MCI when asked how to safely prepare an NRTE product. The 

results indicated that for the two NRTE products examined, participants were 

significantly more likely to look at the MCI before the SHI label. 
Executive Summary

ES-3

▪ Regarding participants’ ability to correctly distinguish between RTE products and 

NRTE products, the study found that participants are better at correctly 

identifying NRTE products than RTE products, that is, some participants 

incorrectly classified RTE products as NRTE products. From a food safety 

standpoint, participants handling and preparing RTE products as NRTE is not a 

concern.