IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v16y2019i13p2268-d243336.html

Cognitive Biases of Consumers’ Risk Perception of Foodborne Diseases in China: Examining Anchoring Effect

Author

Listed:
  • Lijie Shan

    (Institute for Food Safety Risk Management, Jiangnan University, Wuxi 214122, China
    School of Business, Jiangnan University, Wuxi 214122, China)

  • Shusai Wang

    (School of Business, Jiangnan University, Wuxi 214122, China)

  • Linhai Wu

    (Institute for Food Safety Risk Management, Jiangnan University, Wuxi 214122, China
    School of Business, Jiangnan University, Wuxi 214122, China)

  • Fu-Sheng Tsai

    (Department of Business Administration, Cheng Shiu University, Kaohsiung 83347, Taiwan
    Center for Environmental Toxin and Emerging-Contaminant Research, Cheng Shiu University, Kaohsiung 83347, Taiwan
    Super Micro Mass Research and Technology Center, Cheng Shiu University, Kaohsiung 83347, Taiwan)

Abstract

Consumer cognitive biases arise from judgment and decision-making due to their limitations in information processing. As one of the important cognitive biases, the anchoring effect plays a significant role in interfering with consumers’ risk perception. With a stratified random approach, we collected survey data from 375 consumers in Wuxi, Jiangsu Province, China. Based on these data, this study attempted to analyze the anchoring effect in consumers’ risk perception of foodborne diseases (FBDs) and the differences in their perception before and after intervention in a contrast experiment using the anchoring index and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The results confirm the existence of the proposed anchoring effect. Moreover, the experimenter-provided anchor value, a history of FBD, and familiarity with FBD were found to be important factors influencing this anchoring effect. Therefore, improving consumers’ risk perception of FBD is critical to the long-term prevention of FBD risks by the government and consumers. The government should strengthen active monitoring, publicity, and education about FBD.

Suggested Citation

  • Lijie Shan & Shusai Wang & Linhai Wu & Fu-Sheng Tsai, 2019. "Cognitive Biases of Consumers’ Risk Perception of Foodborne Diseases in China: Examining Anchoring Effect," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-14, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:13:p:2268-:d:243336
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/13/2268/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/13/2268/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Linhai Wu & Lingling Xu & Dian Zhu & Xiaoli Wang, 2012. "Factors Affecting Consumer Willingness to Pay for Certified Traceable Food in Jiangsu Province of China," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 60(3), pages 317-333, September.
    2. Markku Kaustia & Eeva Alho & Vesa Puttonen, 2008. "How Much Does Expertise Reduce Behavioral Biases? The Case of Anchoring Effects in Stock Return Estimates," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 37(3), pages 391-412, September.
    3. Chang, Chuang-Chang & Chao, Ching-Hsiang & Yeh, Jin-Huei, 2016. "The role of buy-side anchoring bias: Evidence from the real estate market," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 34-58.
    4. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    5. Oechssler, Jörg & Roider, Andreas & Schmitz, Patrick W., 2009. "Cognitive abilities and behavioral biases," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 147-152, October.
    6. Todd McElroy & Keith Dowd, 2007. "Susceptibility to anchoring effects: How openness-to-experience influences responses to anchoring cues," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 2, pages 48-53, February.
    7. Ibrahim Senay & Kimberly A. Kaphingst, 2009. "Anchoring-and-Adjustment Bias in Communication of Disease Risk," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 29(2), pages 193-201, March.
    8. Chapman, Gretchen B. & Johnson, Eric J., 1999. "Anchoring, Activation, and the Construction of Values, , , , , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 115-153, August.
    9. Noel T. Brewer & Gretchen B. Chapman & Janet A. Schwartz & George R. Bergus, 2007. "The Influence of Irrelevant Anchors on the Judgments and Choices of Doctors and Patients," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 27(2), pages 203-211, March.
    10. Lumka S. Dastile & Joseph Francis & Voster Muchenje, 2017. "Consumers’ Social Representations of Meat Safety in Two Selected Restaurants of Raymond Mhlaba Municipality in the Eastern Cape, South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-9, September.
    11. Tracy D. Morse & Humphreys Masuku & Sarah Rippon & Hudson Kubwalo, 2018. "Achieving an Integrated Approach to Food Safety and Hygiene—Meeting the Sustainable Development Goals in Sub-Saharan Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-20, July.
    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. Ewen Todd, 2020. "Food-Borne Disease Prevention and Risk Assessment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-13, July.
    2. Seol-A Kwon & Hyun-Jung Yoo & Eugene Song, 2020. "Korean Consumers’ Recognition of Risks Depending on the Provision of Safety Information for Chemical Products," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-12, February.
    3. Chuanhui Liao & Yu Luo & Weiwei Zhu, 2020. "Food Safety Trust, Risk Perception, and Consumers’ Response to Company Trust Repair Actions in Food Recall Crises," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-16, February.
    4. Paohui Lin & Hsientang Tsai & Tzuya Ho, 2020. "Food Safety Gaps between Consumers’ Expectations and Perceptions: Development and Verification of a Gap-Assessment Tool," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-17, August.

    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. Víctor Alberto Pena & Alina G�mez-Mej�a, 2019. "Effect of the anchoring and adjustment heuristic and optimism bias in stock market forecasts," Revista Finanzas y Politica Economica, Universidad Católica de Colombia, vol. 11(2), pages 389-409.
    2. Nathan N. Cheek & Sarah Coe-Odess & Barry Schwartz, 2015. "What have I just done? Anchoring, self-knowledge, and judgments of recent behavior," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(1), pages 76-85, January.
    3. Markus Spiwoks & Zulia Gubaydullina, 2020. "The Magic of Figures: Anchoring and Interferences," Journal of Finance and Investment Analysis, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 9(3), pages 1-2.
    4. Winkler, Jens & Moser, Roger, 2016. "Biases in future-oriented Delphi studies: A cognitive perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 63-76.
    5. Furnham, Adrian & Boo, Hua Chu, 2011. "A literature review of the anchoring effect," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 35-42, February.
    6. Daniel Fonseca Costa & Francisval Carvalho & Bruno César Moreira & José Willer Prado, 2017. "Bibliometric analysis on the association between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring effect and confirmation bias," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1775-1799, June.
    7. repec:osf:osfxxx:964ba_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Lukas Meub & Till Proeger, 2018. "Are groups ‘less behavioral’? The case of anchoring," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(2), pages 117-150, August.
    9. Kevin Bauer & Andrej Gill, 2024. "Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: Algorithmic Assessments, Transparency, and Self-Fulfilling Prophecies," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 35(1), pages 226-248, March.
    10. Feng, Lei & Zhang, Minghui & Li, Yixin & Jiang, Yan, 2020. "Satisfaction principle or efficiency principle? Decision-making behavior of peasant households in China’s rural land market," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    11. Meub, Lukas & Proeger, Till & Bizer, Kilian, 2013. "Anchoring: A valid explanation for biased forecasts when rational predictions are easily accessible and well incentivized?," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 166, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    12. Francesco D’Acunto & Daniel Hoang & Maritta Paloviita & Michael Weber, 2023. "IQ, Expectations, and Choice," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(5), pages 2292-2325.
    13. Leonardo P. Barcellos & Ricardo L. Cardoso & Rodrigo de O. Leite, 2025. "The effects of cognitive reflection and work experience on financial statement comparability under principles-based accounting standards," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(2), pages 449-471, March.
    14. Utz Weitzel & Christoph Huber & Jürgen Huber & Michael Kirchler & Florian Lindner & Julia Rose & Lauren Cohen, 2020. "Bubbles and Financial Professionals," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 33(6), pages 2659-2696.
    15. Qian Wang & Michael Chau & Chih-Hung Peng & Eric W. T. Ngai, 2022. "Using the Anchoring Effect and the Cultural Dimensions Theory to Study Customers’ Online Rating Behaviors," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 1451-1463, October.
    16. Schwaiger, Rene & Kirchler, Michael & Lindner, Florian & Weitzel, Utz, 2020. "Determinants of investor expectations and satisfaction. A study with financial professionals," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    17. Adam Farago & Martin Holmén & Felix Holzmeister & Michael Kirchler & Michael Razen, 2019. "Cognitive Skills and Economic Preferences in the Fund Industry," Working Papers 2019-16, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    18. Bao, Te & Corgnet, Brice & Hanaki, Nobuyuki & Okada, Katsuhiko & Riyanto, Yohanes E. & Zhu, Jiahua, 2025. "Financial forecasting in the lab and the field: Qualified professionals vs. smart students," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    19. Meub, Lukas & Proeger, Till, 2016. "Are groups 'less behavioral'? The case of anchoring," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 188 [rev.], University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    20. Maggie Rong Hu & Xiaoyang Li & Yang Shi & Xiaoquan (Michael) Zhang, 2023. "Numerological Heuristics and Credit Risk in Peer-to-Peer Lending," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 1744-1760, December.
    21. Barbera, Michael & Northey, Gavin & Septianto, Felix & Spanjaard, Daniela, 2018. "Those prices are HOT! How temperature-related visual cues anchor expectations of price and value," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 178-181.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:13:p:2268-:d:243336. 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (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.