IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v120y2020icp608-618.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Female responses to genetically modified foods: Effects of the menstrual cycle and food risk concerns

Author

Listed:
  • Chen, Rui
  • Liu, Maggie Wenjing
  • Guan, Yuhong
  • Zheng, Yuhuang

Abstract

Despite widespread adoption of genetically modified (GM) agriculture and the sale of GM foods, consumers are still apprehensive about it. This paper identifies menstrual cycle as a novel factor influencing consumer attitudes towards GM foods. We propose that female consumers lower their evaluations of GM foods in the luteal phase compared with the early follicular phase and ovulatory phase, as the salience of food risk concerns rises in the luteal phase. We conducted four studies and one single-paper meta-analysis to test this basic effect and the underlying mechanism of perceived risk of GM foods through a tracking survey, real food tasting, and scenario evaluation. The findings contribute to the literature of consumer attitudes to GM foods by identifying a unique influencing factor, and also reveal that during the luteal phase female consumers do not just seek more food but also avoid certain types of food.

Suggested Citation

  • Chen, Rui & Liu, Maggie Wenjing & Guan, Yuhong & Zheng, Yuhuang, 2020. "Female responses to genetically modified foods: Effects of the menstrual cycle and food risk concerns," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 608-618.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:120:y:2020:i:c:p:608-618
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.06.039
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296319303996
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.06.039?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stenstrom, Eric P. & Saad, Gad & Hingston, Sean T., 2018. "Menstrual cycle effects on prosocial orientation, gift giving, and charitable giving," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 82-88.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:12:y:2017:i:5:p:466-480 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Kristina M. Durante & Ashley Rae Arsena, 2015. "Playing the Field: The Effect of Fertility on Women's Desire for Variety," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 41(6), pages 1372-1391.
    4. Wilhelm Klümper & Matin Qaim, 2014. "A Meta-Analysis of the Impacts of Genetically Modified Crops," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(11), pages 1-7, November.
    5. Delmond, Anthony R. & McCluskey, Jill J. & Yormirzoev, Mirzobobo & Rogova, Maria A., 2018. "Russian consumer willingness to pay for genetically modified food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 91-100.
    6. Kristina M. Durante & Vladas Griskevicius & Sarah E. Hill & Carin Perilloux & Norman P. Li, 2011. "Ovulation, Female Competition, and Product Choice: Hormonal Influences on Consumer Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 37(6), pages 921-934.
    7. Michael Siegrist, 2000. "The Influence of Trust and Perceptions of Risks and Benefits on the Acceptance of Gene Technology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(2), pages 195-204, April.
    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. Steven J. Stanton & Walter Sinnott-Armstrong & Scott A. Huettel, 2017. "Neuromarketing: Ethical Implications of its Use and Potential Misuse," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(4), pages 799-811, September.
    2. Stenstrom, Eric P. & Saad, Gad & Hingston, Sean T., 2018. "Menstrual cycle effects on prosocial orientation, gift giving, and charitable giving," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 82-88.
    3. Durante, Kristina M. & Griskevicius, Vladas & Ulu, Sevincgul (Sev), 2020. "The effect of fertility on loss aversion," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 599-607.
    4. Gesa Busch & Erin Ryan & Marina A. G. Keyserlingk & Daniel M. Weary, 2022. "Citizen views on genome editing: effects of species and purpose," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(1), pages 151-164, March.
    5. Kyungsoo Nam & Heesun Lim & Byeong-il Ahn, 2020. "Information Values on the Consumer’s Valuation of non-GM Material: The Case of Cooking Oil in Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-19, September.
    6. PK Gupta, 2018. "An Assessment of Relative Risks to Human/Ecological Health Biotech Crops versus Other Human Activities," Current Investigations in Agriculture and Current Research, Lupine Publishers, LLC, vol. 1(2), pages 51-62, February.
    7. Kang, Min Jung & Park, Heejun, 2011. "Impact of experience on government policy toward acceptance of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles in Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3465-3475, June.
    8. Vincent Smith & Justus H. H. Wesseler & David Zilberman, 2021. "New Plant Breeding Technologies: An Assessment of the Political Economy of the Regulatory Environment and Implications for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, March.
    9. Nicolás Bronfman & Pamela Cisternas & Esperanza López-Vázquez & Luis Cifuentes, 2016. "Trust and risk perception of natural hazards: implications for risk preparedness in Chile," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 81(1), pages 307-327, March.
    10. Sangsomboon Ploywarin & Yan Song & Dian Sun, 2018. "Research on Factors Affecting Public Risk Perception of Thai High-Speed Railway Projects Based on “Belt and Road Initiative”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.
    11. Li Li & John Robert Bautista, 2019. "Examining Personal and Media Factors Associated with Attitude towards Genetically Modified Foods among University Students in Kunming, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-14, November.
    12. Samia Ayyub & Xuhui Wang & Muhammad Asif & Rana Muhammad Ayyub, 2018. "Antecedents of Trust in Organic Foods: The Mediating Role of Food Related Personality Traits," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-17, October.
    13. Francesca Di Cicco & Maike Loos & Isa Vos & Rebecca Gibson & Yuvesveri Naidoo & Susan Gifford & Monique A. M. Smeets, 2024. "The Smell of Sustainability: Understanding Consumers’ Acceptability of Recycled Plastic Packaging with an Off-Odor," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-26, June.
    14. Phélinas, Pascale & Choumert, Johanna, 2017. "Is GM Soybean Cultivation in Argentina Sustainable?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 452-462.
    15. Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas & Lusk, Jayson & Magnier, Alexandre, 2018. "The price of non-genetically modified (non-GM) food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 38-50.
    16. Timothy C. Earle, 2004. "Thinking Aloud about Trust: A Protocol Analysis of Trust in Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(1), pages 169-183, February.
    17. Fung, Timothy K.F. & Choi, Doo Hun & Scheufele, Dietram A. & Shaw, Bret R., 2014. "Public opinion about biofuels: The interplay between party identification and risk/benefit perception," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 344-355.
    18. Yawson, Robert M. & Kuzma, Jennifer, 2010. "Evidence review and experts’ opinion on consumer acceptance of agrifood nanotechnology," MPRA Paper 40807, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Kelley, Jonathan, 2014. "Beware of feedback effects among trust, risk and public opinion: Quantitative estimates of rational versus emotional influences on attitudes toward genetic modification," MPRA Paper 60585, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Paul Vincelli, 2016. "Genetic Engineering and Sustainable Crop Disease Management: Opportunities for Case-by-Case Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-22, May.

    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:eee:jbrese:v:120:y:2020:i:c:p:608-618. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    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.