IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i4p1761-d497775.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

GMO Food Labels Do Not Affect College Student Food Selection, Despite Negative Attitudes towards GMOs

Author

Listed:
  • Katrina Oselinsky

    (Department of Psychology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA)

  • Ashlie Johnson

    (Department of Psychology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA)

  • Pamela Lundeberg

    (Department of Psychology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA)

  • Abby Johnson Holm

    (Department of Psychology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA)

  • Megan Mueller

    (Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA)

  • Dan J. Graham

    (Department of Psychology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA)

Abstract

US Public Law 114–216 dictates that food producers in the United States of America will be required to label foods containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) starting in 2022; however, there is little empirical evidence demonstrating how U.S. consumers would use food labels that indicate the presence or absence of GMOs. The aim of this two-phase study was to determine how attitudes towards GMOs relate to food choices and how labels indicating the presence or absence of GMOs differentially impact choices among college students—the age group which values transparent food labeling more than any other. Participants ( n = 434) made yes/no choices for each of 64 foods. In both phases of the study, participants were randomly assigned to seeing GMO Free labels, contains GMOs labels, or no GMO labels. Across the two phases, 85% of participants reported believing that GMOs were at least somewhat dangerous to health (42% believed GMOs to be dangerous), yet in both studies, although eye-tracking data verified that participants attended to the GMO labels, these labels did not significantly affect food choices. Although college consumers may believe GMOs to be dangerous, their food choices do not reflect this belief.

Suggested Citation

  • Katrina Oselinsky & Ashlie Johnson & Pamela Lundeberg & Abby Johnson Holm & Megan Mueller & Dan J. Graham, 2021. "GMO Food Labels Do Not Affect College Student Food Selection, Despite Negative Attitudes towards GMOs," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-19, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:1761-:d:497775
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1761/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1761/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    2. Roe, Brian & Teisl, Mario F., 2007. "Genetically modified food labeling: The impacts of message and messenger on consumer perceptions of labels and products," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 49-66, February.
    3. Irene C. Kamenidou & Spyridon A. Mamalis & Stavros Pavlidis & Evangelia-Zoi G. Bara, 2019. "Segmenting the Generation Z Cohort University Students Based on Sustainable Food Consumption Behavior: A Preliminary Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-22, February.
    4. Jaclyn Centanni & Allison Jancsura & Brad Sidaras & Gregory W. Arburn, 2017. "Public Knowledge Of Genetically Modified Organisms In Food And The Impact On Businesses: Evidence From The U.S," Global Journal of Business Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 11(3), pages 27-37.
    5. Jane Kolodinsky & Sean Morris & Orest Pazuniak, 2019. "How consumers use mandatory genetic engineering (GE) labels: evidence from Vermont," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(1), pages 117-125, March.
    6. Kemper, Nathan P. & Popp, Jennie S. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Kerr, J. Brinck, 2018. "Cultural worldview and genetically modified food policy preferences," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 68-83.
    7. Bovay, John & Alston, Julian M., 2018. "GMO food labels in the United States: Economic implications of the new law," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 14-25.
    8. Lusk, Jayson L. & Jamal, Mustafa & Kurlander, Lauren & Roucan, Maud & Taulman, Lesley, 2005. "A Meta-Analysis of Genetically Modified Food Valuation Studies," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 30(1), pages 1-17, April.
    9. Rebecca C. A. Tobi & Francesca Harris & Ritu Rana & Kerry A. Brown & Matthew Quaife & Rosemary Green, 2019. "Sustainable Diet Dimensions. Comparing Consumer Preference for Nutrition, Environmental and Social Responsibility Food Labelling: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-22, November.
    10. Jura Liaukonyte & Nadia A. Streletskaya & Harry M. Kaiser & Bradley J. Rickard, 2013. "Consumer Response to "Contains" and "Free of" Labeling: Evidence from Lab Experiments," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 35(3), pages 476-507.
    11. Robert Bumbac & Magdalena Bobe & Roxana Procopie & Rodica Pamfilie & Smaranda Giușcă & Calcedonia Enache, 2020. "How Zoomers’ Eating Habits Should be Considered in Shaping the Food System for 2030—A Case Study on the Young Generation from Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-18, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tonia Ruppenthal, 2023. "Eye-Tracking Studies on Sustainable Food Consumption: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-32, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. José Alberto Martínez-González & Carmen D. Álvarez-Albelo, 2021. "Influence of Site Personalization and First Impression on Young Consumers’ Loyalty to Tourism Websites," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, January.
    2. José Alberto Martínez-González & Eduardo Parra-López & Almudena Barrientos-Báez, 2021. "Young Consumers’ Intention to Participate in the Sharing Economy: An Integrated Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, January.
    3. Dolores Garrido & Ana Espínola‐Arredondo & Felix Munoz‐Garcia, 2020. "Can mandatory certification promote greenwashing? A signaling approach," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(6), pages 1801-1851, December.
    4. Craig F. Berning & Brian E. Roe, 2017. "Assessing the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard of 2016: Can Americans Access Electronic Disclosure Information?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-9, May.
    5. Ruxandra Malina Petrescu-Mag & Iris Vermeir & Dacinia Crina Petrescu & Florin Laurentiu Crista & Ioan Banatean-Dunea, 2020. "Traditional Foods at the Click of a Button: The Preference for the Online Purchase of Romanian Traditional Foods during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-15, November.
    6. Costanigro, Marco & Lusk, Jayson L., 2014. "The signaling effect of mandatory labels on genetically engineered food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 259-267.
    7. Liaukonyte, Jura & Streletskaya, Nadia A. & Kaiser, Harry M., 2015. "Noisy Information Signals and Endogenous Preferences for Labeled Attributes," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(2), pages 1-24, May.
    8. Tatjana Mamula Nikolić & Ivan Paunović & Mirjana Milovanović & Nenad Lozović & Marija Đurović, 2022. "Examining Generation Z’s Attitudes, Behavior and Awareness Regarding Eco-Products: A Bayesian Approach to Confirmatory Factor Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-16, February.
    9. Jura Liaukonyte & Nadia A. Streletskaya & Harry M. Kaiser, 2015. "The Long-Term Impact of Positive and Negative Information on Food Demand," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 63(4), pages 539-562, December.
    10. Aaron Adalja & Jūra Liaukonytė & Emily Wang & Xinrong Zhu, 2023. "GMO and Non-GMO Labeling Effects: Evidence from a Quasi-Natural Experiment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(2), pages 233-250, March.
    11. Adalja, Aaron A., 2022. "Voluntary Quality Disclosure in Credence Good Markets," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322570, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Fan, Linlin & Stevens, Andrew W. & Thomas, Betty, 2022. "Consumer purchasing response to mandatory genetically engineered labeling," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    13. Adalja, Aaron A., 2018. "The Impact of Voluntary Non-GMO Labeling on Demand in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 273817, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Santeramo, Fabio Gaetano & Lamonaca, Emilia, 2020. "Objective risk and subjective risk: The role of information in food supply chains," MPRA Paper 104515, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Houman Hashemzadeh & Alireza Karbasi & Hosein Mohammadi & Ali Firoozzare & Flavio Boccia, 2022. "Investigating the Effect of Nudges on Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Genetically Modified Corn Oil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, October.
    16. Manuel Thiel & Rainer Marggraf, 2009. "Gentechnik oder nicht Gentechnik - Bestimmungsgründe der Wahl von (nicht) gentechnisch veränderten Produkten," Journal of Socio-Economics in Agriculture (Until 2015: Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 2(1), pages 35-58.
    17. Hopkins, Kelsey A. & McKendree, Melissa G. S. & Rice, Emma D., 2020. "Understanding the U.S. Publics’ Voting on Animal Welfare and Genetically Modified Organism Labeling Ballot Initiatives," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304519, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Maria Andersson & Ola Eriksson & Chris Von Borgstede, 2012. "The Effects of Environmental Management Systems on Source Separation in the Work and Home Settings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-17, June.
    19. Tran Huy Phuong & Thanh Trung Hieu, 2015. "Predictors of Entrepreneurial Intentions of Undergraduate Students in Vietnam: An Empirical Study," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 5(8), pages 46-55, August.
    20. H. Eggert & M. Greaker, 2011. "Trade, GMOs and Environmental Risk: Are Current Policies Likely to Improve Welfare?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(4), pages 587-608, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:4:p:1761-:d:497775. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.