IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v24y2004i5p1311-1321.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reactions to Genetically Modified Food Crops and How Perception of Risks and Benefits Influences Consumers' Information Gathering

Author

Listed:
  • Carlene Wilson
  • Greg Evans
  • Phil Leppard
  • Julie Syrette

Abstract

Previous research has reported strong consumer perception that genetically modified (GM) food crops may lead to adverse outcomes in a number of different areas. This is despite the widespread promulgation of the potential benefits and opportunities ascribed to the same technology by many scientists and other experts. A computer‐based information gathering and evaluation task was completed by 198 adults to assess the extent to which their initial focus on the dangers or opportunities of genetic modification, or both, could be ascribed to the manner in which they gathered information on the topic (heuristically vs. systematically). Results did not confirm the hypothesis that initial focus (risks, benefits, or both) predicted ongoing information gathering and evaluation behavior. Moreover, also contrary to prediction, most participants primarily used systematic strategies when deriving their initial position, regardless of that opinion. Participants found it difficult to achieve a balanced perspective on GM food crop, even though balanced argument, as measured by order of story selection and time spent reading, was preferred as the source of information. Perceived importance is probably the most influential variable determining information gathering about issues or events to which a level of risk is attached.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlene Wilson & Greg Evans & Phil Leppard & Julie Syrette, 2004. "Reactions to Genetically Modified Food Crops and How Perception of Risks and Benefits Influences Consumers' Information Gathering," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(5), pages 1311-1321, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:24:y:2004:i:5:p:1311-1321
    DOI: 10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00528.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00528.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00528.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kurt Neuwirth & Sharon Dunwoody & Robert J. Griffin, 2000. "Protection Motivation and Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(5), pages 721-734, October.
    2. Lynn J. Frewer & Chaya Howard & Duncan Hedderley & Richard Shepherd, 1998. "Methodological Approaches to Assessing Risk Perceptions Associated with Food‐Related Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(1), pages 95-102, February.
    3. Srinivasan, Narasimhan & Ratchford, Brian T, 1991. "An Empirical Test of a Model of External Search for Automobiles," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 18(2), pages 233-242, September.
    4. Craig W. Trumbo, 1999. "Heuristic‐Systematic Information Processing and Risk Judgment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 391-400, June.
    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. Branden B. Johnson, 2005. "Testing and Expanding a Model of Cognitive Processing of Risk Information," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(3), pages 631-650, June.
    2. Wouter Poortinga & Nick F. Pidgeon, 2006. "Exploring the Structure of Attitudes Toward Genetically Modified Food," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(6), pages 1707-1719, December.
    3. Josephine, Faass & Michael, Lahr, 2007. "Towards a More Holistic Understanding of American Support for Genetically Modified Crops: An Examination of Influential Factors Using a Binomial Dependent Variable," MPRA Paper 6124, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Anneloes Meijnders & Cees Midden & Anna Olofsson & Susanna Öhman & Jörg Matthes & Olha Bondarenko & Jan Gutteling & Maria Rusanen, 2009. "The Role of Similarity Cues in the Development of Trustin Sources of Information About GM Food," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(8), pages 1116-1128, August.
    5. Liu, Peng, 2020. "Positive, negative, ambivalent, or indifferent? Exploring the structure of public attitudes toward self-driving vehicles on public roads," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 27-38.
    6. Robert Yawson & Jennifer Kuzma, 2010. "Systems Mapping of Consumer Acceptance of Agrifood Nanotechnology," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 299-322, December.
    7. Zhengtao Li & Henk Folmer & Jianhong Xue, 2016. "Perception of Air Pollution in the Jinchuan Mining Area, China: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, July.
    8. Wenjing Zhang & Jianhong Xue & Henk Folmer & Khadim Hussain, 2019. "Perceived Risk of Genetically Modified Foods Among Residents in Xi’an, China: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-12, February.
    9. Wouter Poortinga & Nick F. Pidgeon, 2004. "Trust, the Asymmetry Principle, and the Role of Prior Beliefs," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(6), pages 1475-1486, December.

    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. Jiuchang Wei & Ming Zhao & Fei Wang & Peng Cheng & Dingtao Zhao, 2016. "An Empirical Study of the Volkswagen Crisis in China: Customers’ Information Processing and Behavioral Intentions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(1), pages 114-129, January.
    2. Branden B. Johnson, 2005. "Testing and Expanding a Model of Cognitive Processing of Risk Information," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(3), pages 631-650, June.
    3. Liyue Gong & Hao Jiang & Xusheng Wu & Yi Kong & Yunyun Gao & Hao Liu & Yi Guo & Dehua Hu, 2022. "Exploring Users’ Health Behavior Changes in Online Health Communities: Heuristic-Systematic Perspective Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-14, September.
    4. Inwon Kang & Deokhee Cheon & Matthew Shin, 2011. "Advertising strategy for outbound travel services," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 5(4), pages 361-380, December.
    5. Peng Cheng & Zhe Ouyang & Yang Liu, 0. "The effect of information overload on the intention of consumers to adopt electric vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    6. Hesping, Frank Henrik & Schiele, Holger, 2016. "Matching tactical sourcing levers with the Kraljič matrix: Empirical evidence on purchasing portfolios," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 101-117.
    7. Gaurav Khatwani & Gopal Das, 2016. "Evaluating combination of individual pre-purchase internet information channels using hybrid fuzzy MCDM technique: demographics as moderators," International Journal of Indian Culture and Business Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 12(1), pages 28-49.
    8. Juliana Martins Ruzante & Valerie J. Davidson & Julie Caswell & Aamir Fazil & John A. L. Cranfield & Spencer J. Henson & Sven M. Anders & Claudia Schmidt & Jeffrey M. Farber, 2010. "A Multifactorial Risk Prioritization Framework for Foodborne Pathogens," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(5), pages 724-742, May.
    9. Jiyoun Kim & Sara K. Yeo & Dominique Brossard & Dietram A. Scheufele & Michael A. Xenos, 2014. "Disentangling the Influence of Value Predispositions and Risk/Benefit Perceptions on Support for Nanotechnology Among the American Public," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(5), pages 965-980, May.
    10. Claudia Seabra & Luis Filipe Lages & Jose Luis Abrantes, 2003. "The infosource scale: a measure to assess the importance of external tourism information sources," Nova SBE Working Paper Series wp440, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Nova School of Business and Economics.
    11. D. G. Webster & Semra A. Aytur & Mark Axelrod & Robyn S. Wilson & Joseph A. Hamm & Linda Sayed & Amber L. Pearson & Pedro Henrique C. Torres & Alero Akporiaye & Oran Young, 2022. "Learning from the Past: Pandemics and the Governance Treadmill," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-26, March.
    12. Teo, Thompson S. H. & Yeong, Yon Ding, 2003. "Assessing the consumer decision process in the digital marketplace," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 349-363, October.
    13. Tibert Verhagen & Daniel Bloemers, 2018. "Exploring the cognitive and affective bases of online purchase intentions: a hierarchical test across product types," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 537-561, September.
    14. Ryo Kato & Takahiro Hoshino & Daisuke Moriwaki & Shintaro Okazaki, 2022. "Mobile Targeting: Exploring the Role of Area Familiarity, Store Knowledge, and Promotional Incentives," Discussion Paper Series DP2022-10, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University.
    15. Gensler, Sonja & Neslin, Scott A. & Verhoef, Peter C., 2017. "The Showrooming Phenomenon: It's More than Just About Price," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 29-43.
    16. Singh, Sonika & Ratchford, Brian T. & Prasad, Ashutosh, 2014. "Offline and Online Search in Used Durables Markets," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 301-320.
    17. Yaprak, Ümit & Kılıç, Fatih & Okumuş, Abdullah, 2021. "Is the Covid-19 pandemic strong enough to change the online order delivery methods? Changes in the relationship between attitude and behavior towards order delivery by drone," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    18. Geunsik Kim & Seoyong Kim & Eunjung Hwang, 2021. "Searching for Evidence-Based Public Policy and Practice: Analysis of the Determinants of Personal/Public Adaptation and Mitigation Behavior against Particulate Matter by Focusing on the Roles of Risk ," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-22, January.
    19. Michael K. Lindell & Seong Nam Hwang, 2008. "Households' Perceived Personal Risk and Responses in a Multihazard Environment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 539-556, April.
    20. Davies, Antony & Cline, Thomas W., 2005. "A consumer behavior approach to modeling monopolistic competition," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 797-826, December.

    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:wly:riskan:v:24:y:2004:i:5:p:1311-1321. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.