IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v86y2004i5p1222-1229.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who Do Consumers Trust for Information: The Case of Genetically Modified Foods?

Author

Listed:
  • Wallace E. Huffman
  • Matthew Rousu
  • Jason F. Shogren
  • Abebayehu Tegene

Abstract

To be effective, groups that disseminate information need the trust of consumers. When multiple groups provide conflicting information on a new product or process like GM-foods, consumers place different levels of trust in the various sources. We present a model of the contributions of personal and social capital of a consumer, and test a multinominal logit model of relative trust in five different sources of information on genetic modification using a unique data set. Among our findings is that an increase in consumer's education lowers the probability of trusting information from government, private industry/organizations, consumer and environmental groups, or other sources relative to information from an independent, third-party source, and conservative religious affiliation reduces the odds of a consumer trusting private industry/organization and increases the odds of trusting nobody relative to an independent, third-party source.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Wallace E. Huffman & Matthew Rousu & Jason F. Shogren & Abebayehu Tegene, 2004. "Who Do Consumers Trust for Information: The Case of Genetically Modified Foods?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1222-1229.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:86:y:2004:i:5:p:1222-1229
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.0002-9092.2004.00669.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rousu, Matthew & Huffman, Wallace & Shogren, Jason F. & Tegene, Abebayehu, 2002. "The Value of Verifiable Information in a Controversial Market: Evidence from Lab Auctions of Genetically Modified Food," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10009, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Jerry A. Hausman, 1996. "Valuation of New Goods under Perfect and Imperfect Competition," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of New Goods, pages 207-248, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Huffman, Wallace E. & Tegene, Abebayehu, 2002. "Public Acceptance of and Benefits from Agricultural Biotechnology: A Key Role for Verifiable Information," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10435, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Bianchi, Marina, 2002. "Novelty, preferences, and fashion: when goods are unsettling," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 1-18, January.
    5. Michael J. Boskin, 1998. "Consumer Prices, the Consumer Price Index, and the Cost of Living," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(1), pages 3-26, Winter.
    6. Wallace E. Huffman, 1977. "Allocative Efficiency: The Role of Human Capital," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 91(1), pages 59-79.
    7. Timothy F. Bresnahan & Robert J. Gordon, 1996. "The Economics of New Goods," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number bres96-1, March.
    8. Huffman, Wallace E. & Shogren, Jason F. & Rousu, Matthew & Tegene, Abe, 2001. "The Value of Consumers of Genetically Modified Food Labels in a Market with Diverse Information: Evidence from Experimental Auctions," ISU General Staff Papers 200112010800001346, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    9. Huffman, Wallace E. & Shogren, Jason F. & Rousu, Matthew C. & Tegene, Abebayehu, 2001. "The Value To Consumers Of Gm Food Labels In A Market With Asymmetric Information: Evidence From Experimental Auctions," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20553, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. Kinsey, Jean D. & Wolfson, Paul J. & Katsaras, Nikolaos & Senauer, Benjamin, 2001. "Data Mining: A Segmentation Analysis Of U.S. Grocery Shoppers," Working Papers 14335, University of Minnesota, The Food Industry Center.
    11. Schultz, Theodore W, 1975. "The Value of the Ability to Deal with Disequilibria," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 827-846, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Huffman, Wallace & Rousu, Matthew & Shogren, Jason F. & Tegene, Abebayehu, 2003. "Better Dead Than GM-Fed? Information and the Effects of Consumers' Resistance to GM-Foods in High-Income Countries," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10345, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Huffman, Wallace E. & Rousu, Matthew C. & Shogren, Jason F. & Tegene, Abebayehu, 2003. "Consumers' Resistance To Genetically Modified Foods In High Income Countries: The Role Of Information In An Uncertain Environment," 2003 Annual Meeting, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa 25837, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. D Rigby & M Burton, 2003. "Capturing Preference Heterogeneity in Stated Choice Models: A Random Parameter Logit Model of the Demand for GM Food," Economics Discussion Paper Series 0319, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    4. Huffman, Wallace & Rousu, M. & Shogren, Jason F. & Tegene, Abebayehu, 1009. "Are U.S. Consumers Tolerant of GM Foods?," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12336, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    5. Huffman, Wallace E. & Rousu, Matthew & Shogren, Jason F. & Tegene, Abebayehu, 2007. "The effects of prior beliefs and learning on consumers' acceptance of genetically modified foods," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 193-206, May.
    6. Wallace E. Huffman, 2020. "Human Capital and Adoption of Innovations: Policy Implications," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(1), pages 92-99, March.
    7. Huffman, Wallace & Rousu, Matthew & Shogren, Jason F. & Tegene, Abebayehu, 2002. "Should the United States Regulate Mandatory Labeling for Genetically Modified Foods?," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10047, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    8. D Rigby & M Burton, 2003. "Modeling Indifference and Dislike: A Bounded Bayesian Mixed Logit Model of the UK Market for GM Food," Economics Discussion Paper Series 0327, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    9. Huffman, Wallace, 2004. "Marketizing U.S. Production in the Post-War Era: Implications for Estimating CPI Bias and Real Income from a Complete-Household-Demand System," Staff General Research Papers Archive 11987, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    10. Huffman Wallace E. & Rousu Matthew & Shogren Jason F & Tegene Abebayehu, 2004. "Consumer's Resistance to Genetically Modified Foods: The Role of Information in an Uncertain Environment," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 2(2), pages 1-15, May.
    11. Huffman, Wallace, 2006. "The Story Behind the Post-War Decline in Women's Housework: Prices, Income, Family Size, and Technology Effects in a Demand System," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12601, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    12. Tao Yang, Dennis, 2004. "Education and allocative efficiency: household income growth during rural reforms in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 137-162, June.
    13. W. Erwin Diewert & Robert C. Feenstra, 2021. "Estimating the Benefits of New Products," NBER Chapters, in: Big Data for Twenty-First-Century Economic Statistics, pages 437-473, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Redding, Stephen J. & Weinstein, David E., 2016. "A unified approach to estimating demand and welfare," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 67681, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Lurkin, Virginie & Garrow, Laurie A. & Higgins, Matthew J. & Newman, Jeffrey P. & Schyns, Michael, 2017. "Accounting for price endogeneity in airline itinerary choice models: An application to Continental U.S. markets," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 228-246.
    16. Nevo, Aviv, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the Ready-to-Eat Cereal Industry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 69(2), pages 307-342, March.
    17. Diewert, W, Erwin & Feenstra, Robert, 2017. "Estimating the Benefits and Costs of New and Disappearing Products," Microeconomics.ca working papers tina_marandola-2017-12, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 19 Dec 2017.
    18. Durlauf, Steven N. & Navarro, Salvador & Rivers, David A., 2016. "Model uncertainty and the effect of shall-issue right-to-carry laws on crime," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 32-67.
    19. Marcos Gallacher, 2011. "Returns to Managerial Ability: Dairy Farms in Argentina," CEMA Working Papers: Serie Documentos de Trabajo. 478, Universidad del CEMA.
    20. Lukasz Grzybowski & Frank Verboven, 2016. "Substitution between fixed-line and mobile access: the role of complementarities," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 113-151, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:ajagec:v:86:y:2004:i:5:p:1222-1229. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.