Many British adults want to reduce their intake of ultra-processed foods, but this research shows that confusion, cost, convenience and mixed messages remain obstacles.
Research: Understandings of ultra-processed foods among adults responsible for household food activities in the UK: A qualitative study. Image credit: nau2018 / Shutterstock
In a recent study published in the journal BMC Global and Public Healthresearchers conducted a qualitative study to explore perceptions of ultra-processed foods (UPF) in the United Kingdom (UK). This study utilized thematic analysis based on data from 30 UK adults who were primarily responsible for food in their households.
Results showed that while study participants generally viewed UPF as artificial and potentially unhealthy, they did not easily understand the Nova classification system and were unable to identify classification boundaries. Therefore, this study suggested that policy and environmental changes are likely to help reduce population-level UPF intake nationally, especially in parallel with or beyond education-only approaches.
Background on UPF literacy and Nova classification
In the UK, ultra-processed foods (UPF) now account for more than 50% of the average daily energy intake of the UK population, according to a recent report. The Nova classification system defines UPF as industrially processed foods designed primarily to increase palatability, convenience, and commercial profitability, and further cites a body of epidemiological evidence linking UPF consumption to increased prevalence of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs).
Despite extensive global public health campaigns aimed at educating consumers about the disadvantages of UPF intake, previous quantitative studies have revealed significant literacy gaps in the practical application of UPF. 73% of UK adults are familiar with the term ‘UPF’, but only 13% can correctly classify food. Specifically, participants in a previous study correctly identified only 54% of UPF foods, highlighting persistent “awareness and knowledge” gaps.
Additionally, a European Union public health report found that 41% of European consumers consider UPF to be more convenient than fresh or minimally processed alternatives, further exacerbating this perception and knowledge gap, resulting in an environment with suboptimal dietary outcomes at a population level.
Therefore, researchers hypothesize that understanding how household “gatekeepers” navigate these choices is important for developing equitable food policies. Unfortunately, previous research has provided limited insight into this understanding.
UK UPF interview survey design
This study aimed to address these knowledge gaps and inform future UK food policy by conducting 30 semi-structured one-on-one qualitative interviews (duration = 60 minutes) between July and October 2024. Study participants were recruited through social media and screened to ensure that they had primary responsibility for household food activities, specifically food purchasing decisions and meal preparation.
Summary statistics for the final participant sample cohort revealed that the majority of participants were female (73%, age = 20–72 years) and highly educated (63%).
The methodological framework for this study consisted of recursive thematic analysis in which the researcher used inductive reasoning to interpret patterns across the sample dataset. To increase the rigor and reliability of the analysis, this study includes three public contributors (the “Public Involvement and Engagement (PIE) group”) in an inductive interpretation methodology.
The research interviews included a structured photo classification activity that required participants to classify images of different foods across the Nova classification spectrum. This allowed reviewers to observe individual-level heuristics and disentangle sample-level cohort misconceptions.
Themes in understanding and determining public UPF
Research analysis identified five interrelated themes that characterize the relationship between the UPF and the public. 1. Understanding UPF, 2. Implications for understanding, 3. Decision making regarding UPF, 4. Barriers and enablers to reducing UPF consumption, and 5. Potential solutions.
We found that participants viewed food processing as a continuum rather than a separate category. UPFs such as potato chips and soda were easily identified as highly processed, while “borderline” foods such as yogurt and plant-based meat alternatives were observed to confuse participants.
Additionally, 6 participants revealed that they were not aware of the term “ultra-processed foods” prior to the research interview, while the remaining 24 were observed to rely on shortcuts (e.g., long ingredient lists or the presence of unrecognized chemical additives such as emulsifiers) to distinguish between “processed” foods (Nova Group 3) and “ultra-processed” foods (Nova Group 4).
Notably, while participants primarily viewed industry-sponsored messages with skepticism, they also sometimes found personal testimonials from social media influencers relatable or helpful.
Similarly, negative perceptions of UPF did not necessarily lead to behavioral changes among participants, which was likely due to cost, convenience, preference, family habits, etc.
Impact of policy and communication on UPF reduction
This finding indicates that the relative complexity of the Nova framework may limit its usefulness as a standalone public message, especially if not translated into clear, practical guidance. The authors suggest that while the Nova classification system is a robust expert-informed indicator for defining the functional boundaries of the food spectrum, the UPF may best serve as a policy component used to guide systemic change.
Additionally, while education was a popular proposed solution among participants, the authors stress that “consumer awareness alone is unlikely to produce meaningful change” if minimally processed options remain unaffordable or inaccessible.
In particular, this study is limited by the underrepresentation of individuals with low levels of formal education and those from Black communities, highlighting the need for future research to quantify these perceptions across broader demographics to support the development of practical communication tools and policies to improve dietary habits and reduce UPF intake.
Reference magazines:
- Esman, M., et al. (2026). Understandings of ultra-processed foods among adults responsible for household food activities in the UK: A qualitative study. BMC Global and Public Health, 4(1). Toi – 10.1186/s44263-026-00263-0. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s44263-026-00263-0
