IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/apecpp/v33y2011i3p363-383.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Consumer Responses to Media Food Safety Information Last?

Author

Listed:
  • Robin Dillaway
  • Kent D. Messer
  • John C. Bernard
  • Harry M. Kaiser

Abstract

Using experimental methods with adult subjects from the mid-Atlantic region of the United States, this research examines both the short- and longer-term impacts of media information on consumer purchasing behavior. Subjects in the treatment group were given food safety information about poultry from a popular consumer magazine. Willingness to pay (WTP) estimates were then elicited for two types of chicken breasts: (1) a leading-brand that was identified in the information treatment as having a high incidence of Campylobacter and Salmonella bacteria; and (2) a lesser known brand, which was reported as being relatively free of harmful bacteria. Results indicated that both negative and positive food safety information significantly impacted consumers' WTP for safer chicken compared to the reportedly less-safe leading-brand chicken. These changes in behavior persisted throughout the seven-week study period. Copyright 2011, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Robin Dillaway & Kent D. Messer & John C. Bernard & Harry M. Kaiser, 2011. "Do Consumer Responses to Media Food Safety Information Last?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 363-383.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:apecpp:v:33:y:2011:i:3:p:363-383
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/aepp/ppr019
    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:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Bakhtavoryan, Rafael & Capps, Oral, Jr. & Salin, Victoria, 2012. "Impact of Food Contamination on Brands: A Demand Systems Estimation of Peanut Butter," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 41(3), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Shimokawa, Satoru & Kito, Yayoi & Kudo, Haruyo & Yamaguchi, Michitoshi & Niiyama, Yoko, 2021. "Distinguishing Attitude and Belief Expressions from Economic Preferences in Long-Lasting Aversion in Food Choice," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315249, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Yadavalli, Anita & Jones, Keithly, 2014. "Does media influence consumer demand? The case of lean finely textured beef in the United States," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 219-227.
    4. Anikó Bíró & Ágnes Szabó-Morvai, 2021. "Mass media coverage and vaccination uptake: evidence from the demand for meningococcal vaccinations in Hungary," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(6), pages 887-903, August.
    5. O'Connor, Richard J. & Rousu, Matthew C. & Corrigan, Jay R. & Travers, Maansi Bansal, 2018. "Does winning an experimental auction change people's behavior? An application to e-cigarettes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 281-285.
    6. Ellis, Addison & Kropp, Jaclyn D. & Norton, Michael T., 2013. "Estimating the Indirect Economic Costs to Shrimp Consumers from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon Gulf Coast Oil Spill," 2013 Annual Meeting, February 2-5, 2013, Orlando, Florida 142576, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    7. Zhuo Liu & Christopher A. Kanter & Kent D. Messer & Harry M. Kaiser, 2013. "Identifying significant characteristics of organic milk consumers: a CART analysis of an artefactual field experiment," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(21), pages 3110-3121, July.
    8. Savchenko, Olesya M. & Kecinski, Maik & Li, Tongzhe & Messer, Kent D. & Xu, Huidong, 2018. "Fresh foods irrigated with recycled water: A framed field experiment on consumer responses," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 103-112.
    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. Britwum, Kofi & Yiannaka, Amalia, 2016. "Consumer Willingness to Pay for Food Safety Interventions: The Role of Message Framing and Involvement," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235884, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Britwum, Kofi & Yiannaka, Amalia, 2016. "Changing Food Safety Risk Perceptions: The Influence of Message Framings & Media Food Safety Information," 2016 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2016, San Antonio, Texas 230106, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    12. Peake, Whitney O. & Detre, Joshua D. & Carlson, Clinton C., 2014. "One bad apple spoils the bunch? An exploration of broad consumption changes in response to food recalls," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 13-22.
    13. Chen, Xuan & Liu, Yizao & Jaenicke, Edward C. & Rabinowitz, Adam N., 2018. "The Added Caffeine, Health Concerns and Potential Regulations: The Case of Energy Drinks," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 273853, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    15. Deborah Kerley Keisner & Kent D. Messer & William D. Schulze & Homa Zarghamee, 2013. "Testing Social Preferences for an Economic “Bad”: An Artefactual Field Experiment," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 115(1), pages 27-61, January.
    16. Syed Imran Ali Meerza & Christopher R Gustafson, 2019. "Does prior knowledge of food fraud affect consumer behavior? Evidence from an incentivized economic experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-14, December.
    17. Zavala, Araceli & Ramirez-Marquez, Jose Emmanuel, 2019. "Visual analytics for identifying product disruptions and effects via social media," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 544-559.
    18. Pozo, Veronica F. & Schroeder, Ted C., 2016. "Evaluating the costs of meat and poultry recalls to food firms using stock returns," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 66-77.
    19. Lauren Chenarides & Carola Grebitus & Jayson L Lusk & Iryna Printezis, 2022. "A calibrated choice experiment method," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(5), pages 971-1004.
    20. Vincenzina Caputo, 2020. "Does information on food safety affect consumers' acceptance of new food technologies? The case of irradiated beef in South Korea under a new labelling system and across different information regimes," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(4), pages 1003-1033, October.

    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:apecpp:v:33:y:2011:i:3:p:363-383. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.