Purpose: This paper aims to examine the effect of three types of health-related claims (health, nutrition and ingredient) and product healthiness on situational skepticism toward the claims that appear on the front-of-package of food products. The effect of situational skepticism on the purchase intention of the product is further examined. Methodology: Two experimental studies were conducted with a 3 (health-related claims: health claim vs nutrition claim vs ingredient claim) × 2 (product healthiness: healthy vs unhealthy) between-subjects factorial design. Study 1 investigates the effects within a single product category (Biscuits) and Study 2 the effects across product categories (Salad and Pizza). Findings: The results demonstrate that situational skepticism is the highest for health claims, followed by nutrition claims and the least for ingredient claims. In addition, situational skepticism is higher for claims appearing on unhealthy products vis-à-vis healthy ones. Finally, situational skepticism mediates the relationship between claim type, product healthiness and product purchase intention. Research implications:This study contributes to the field of nutrition labeling by advancing research on information processing of nutrition labels through the lens of the persuasion knowledge model (Friestad and Wright, 1994). Specifically, this study contributes to a nuanced understanding of claim formats on how the language properties of the claim – its vagueness, specificity and verifiability – can affect consumer perception. This study finds that higher specificity, verifiability and lower vagueness of ingredient claims lead to lower skepticism and hence higher purchase intention. Practical implications:Furthermore, this study incrementally contributes to the ongoing discussion about the claim–carrier combination by showing that health-related claims are better perceived on healthy compared to unhealthy products. Hence, managers should avoid health washing.