If you've ever seen the words "Choice" or "Prime" advertising a cut of beef, then you've been influenced by the federal beef quality grading system, which is administered by the Agricultural Marketing Service of the USDA. From "best" to "worst" the grades are Prime, Choice, Select, and Standard.
In a paper forthcoming the Journal of Animal Science, Eric and Megan Devuyst and I report the results of a study revealing that the USDA beef quality grading system likely sends confusing and misleading signals to final consumers (which is exactly the opposite of the purpose of the grading system).
The key determinant of quality in current grading system is "intramuscular fat" - the amount of fat inside the muscle of the steak. Steaks with more fat get higher grades, primarily because of the large amount of research showing that consumers prefer the taste of steaks with more intramuscular fat.
But, do consumers know this? And do they understand the information communicated by the grade names? Based on results of two nationwide surveys (both with over 1,000 people), we believe the answers are clearly: "No".
Most people thought the grade name "Prime" was the leannest, while also expecting it to be juiciest. When looking just at the pictures (the same ones shown above but without the names), most people thought the picture of the Prime steak would be the cheapest, and they were most likely to associate the picture of the Prime steak with the name "Select."
Only 14% of respondents correctly ranked the grade names according to leanness, and only 14% correctly matched the pictures with the respective grade names. That's worse than random guessing (16.67% would be correct just by pure chance given that people had to match three items).
We conclude the paper with the following:
if the current grading system fails to adequately inform consumers of the relative quality of grades, there remains the likelihood that consumers’ expectations will be unmet. There are three potential methods for addressing this lack of understanding. First, the current quality grading system could be dropped in lieu of private or third-party systems. . . .Second, an educational program could be developed to promote knowledge of the link between higher marbled beef and taste. . . . The costs of such an effort, however, are likely to be large, and it is unclear what effects they may have particularly when one realizes the existence of many prior educational efforts that have been undertaken in the 70 year existence of the Prime-Choice quality grade nomenclature. . . . Finally, consumers could likely benefit from more descriptive nomenclature. . . . for example, “USDA Prime—Higher Fat, Most Juicy,” “USDA Choice—Juicy,” and “USDA Select—Less Fat, Less Juicy.”
You can read the whole thing here.