IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v38y2018i9p1904-1920.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Online Information Sharing About Risks: The Case of Organic Food

Author

Listed:
  • Femke Hilverda
  • Margôt Kuttschreuter

Abstract

Individuals have to make sense of an abundance of information to decide whether or not to purchase certain food products. One of the means to sense‐making is information sharing. This article reports on a quantitative study examining online information sharing behavior regarding the risks of organic food products. An online survey among 535 respondents was conducted in the Netherlands to examine the determinants of information sharing behavior, and their relationships. Structural equation modeling was applied to test both the measurement model and the structural model. Results showed that the intention to share information online about the risks of organic food was low. Conversations and email were the preferred channels to share information; of the social media Facebook stood out. The developed model was found to provide an adequate description of the data. It explained 41% of the variance in information sharing. Injunctive norms and outcome expectancies were most important in predicting online information sharing, followed by information‐related determinants. Risk‐perception‐related determinants showed a significant, but weak, positive relationship with online information sharing. Implications for authorities communicating on risks associated with food are addressed.

Suggested Citation

  • Femke Hilverda & Margôt Kuttschreuter, 2018. "Online Information Sharing About Risks: The Case of Organic Food," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1904-1920, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:38:y:2018:i:9:p:1904-1920
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.12980
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12980
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.12980?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. Ellen Ter Huurne & Jan Gutteling, 2008. "Information needs and risk perception as predictors of risk information seeking," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(7), pages 847-862, October.
    2. Tiffany C. Veinot, 2009. "Interactive acquisition and sharing: Understanding the dynamics of HIV/AIDS information networks," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(11), pages 2313-2332, November.
    3. Gee W. Bock & Young-Gul Kim, 2002. "Breaking the Myths of Rewards: An Exploratory Study of Attitudes about Knowledge Sharing," Information Resources Management Journal (IRMJ), IGI Global Scientific Publishing, vol. 15(2), pages 14-21, April.
    4. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    5. Rajdeep Grewal & Joseph A. Cote & Hans Baumgartner, 2004. "Multicollinearity and Measurement Error in Structural Equation Models: Implications for Theory Testing," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 519-529, June.
    6. Margôt Kuttschreuter, 2006. "Psychological Determinants of Reactions to Food Risk Messages," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(4), pages 1045-1057, August.
    7. Roitner-Schobesberger, Birgit & Darnhofer, Ika & Somsook, Suthichai & Vogl, Christian R., 2008. "Consumer perceptions of organic foods in Bangkok, Thailand," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 112-121, April.
    8. James K. Hammitt, 1990. "Risk Perceptions and Food Choice: An Exploratory Analysis of Organic‐ Versus Conventional‐Produce Buyers," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(3), pages 367-374, September.
    9. Sanghee Oh & Sue Yeon Syn, 2015. "Motivations for sharing information and social support in social media: A comparative analysis of Facebook, Twitter, Delicious, YouTube, and Flickr," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(10), pages 2045-2060, October.
    10. Mangold, W. Glynn & Faulds, David J., 2009. "Social media: The new hybrid element of the promotion mix," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 357-365, July.
    11. Shaila M. Miranda & Carol S. Saunders, 2003. "The Social Construction of Meaning: An Alternative Perspective on Information Sharing," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 87-106, March.
    12. Jeffrey A. Roberts & Il-Horn Hann & Sandra A. Slaughter, 2006. "Understanding the Motivations, Participation, and Performance of Open Source Software Developers: A Longitudinal Study of the Apache Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 984-999, July.
    13. Karl E. Weick & Kathleen M. Sutcliffe & David Obstfeld, 2005. "Organizing and the Process of Sensemaking," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 409-421, August.
    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. Zeng, Jing & Duan, Hongyu & Zhu, Weiwei & Song, Jingyan, 2024. "Understanding residents’ risk information seeking, processing and sharing regarding waste incineration power projects," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    2. Cabeza-Ramírez, L. Javier & Sánchez-Cañizares, Sandra M. & Santos-Roldán, Luna M. & Fuentes-García, Fernando J., 2022. "Impact of the perceived risk in influencers' product recommendations on their followers' purchase attitudes and intention," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    3. Piper Liping Liu & Vincent Huang & Melannie Zhan & Xinshu Zhao, 2023. ""Nice You Share in Return": Informational Sharing, Reciprocal Sharing, and Life Satisfaction Amid COVID-19 Pandemic," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 165(2), pages 453-471, January.
    4. Wiese, Melanie & van der Westhuizen, Liezl-Marié, 2024. "Impact of planned power outages (load shedding) on consumers in developing countries: Evidence from South Africa," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    5. Meng Zhang & Yang Gao & Minghe Sun & Datian Bi, 2020. "Influential Factors and the Realization Mechanism of Sustainable Information-Sharing in Virtual Communities from a Knowledge Fermenting Perspective," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, November.
    6. Kayode Ajewole & Elliott Dennis & Ted C. Schroeder & Jason Bergtold, 2021. "Relative valuation of food and non‐food risks with a comparison to actuarial values: A best–worst approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(6), pages 927-943, November.
    7. Nina Veflen & Joachim Scholderer & Solveig Langsrud, 2020. "Situated Food Safety Risk and the Influence of Social Norms," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(5), pages 1092-1110, May.
    8. Judith I. M. de Groot & Elisa Schweiger & Iljana Schubert, 2020. "Social Influence, Risk and Benefit Perceptions, and the Acceptability of Risky Energy Technologies: An Explanatory Model of Nuclear Power Versus Shale Gas," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(6), pages 1226-1243, June.
    9. Han Lv & Xueyan Cao & Shiqi Chen & Liqun Liu, 2022. "Public and Private Information Sharing under “New Normal” of COVID-19: Understanding the Roles of Habit and Outcome Expectation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-26, May.

    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. Dorine Maurice Mattar, 2021. "An Organizational Change With Quarantined Members," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440209, January.
    2. 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.
    3. Tianjun Feng & L. Robin Keller & Ping Wu & Yifan Xu, 2014. "An Empirical Study of the Toxic Capsule Crisis in China: Risk Perceptions and Behavioral Responses," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(4), pages 698-710, April.
    4. Liuan Wang & Lu (Lucy) Yan & Tongxin Zhou & Xitong Guo & Gregory R. Heim, 2020. "Understanding Physicians’ Online-Offline Behavior Dynamics: An Empirical Study," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 537-555, June.
    5. Hang Lu & APPC 2018–2019 ASK Group & Kenneth Winneg & Kathleen Hall Jamieson & Dolores Albarracín, 2020. "Intentions to Seek Information About the Influenza Vaccine: The Role of Informational Subjective Norms, Anticipated and Experienced Affect, and Information Insufficiency Among Vaccinated and Unvaccina," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(10), pages 2040-2056, October.
    6. Diana Tsoy & Danijela Godinic & Qingyan Tong & Bojan Obrenovic & Akmal Khudaykulov & Konstantin Kurpayanidi, 2022. "Impact of Social Media, Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) on the Intention to Stay at Home during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-32, June.
    7. Kim, Youngseek & Adler, Melissa, 2015. "Social scientists’ data sharing behaviors: Investigating the roles of individual motivations, institutional pressures, and data repositories," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 408-418.
    8. Mohammad Tipu Sultan & Farzana Sharmin & Alina Badulescu & Darie Gavrilut & Ke Xue, 2021. "Social Media-Based Content towards Image Formation: A New Approach to the Selection of Sustainable Destinations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-22, April.
    9. Raza, Syed Ali & Shah, Nida & Nisar, Wasay, 2019. "Consumer Buying Behavior of Organic Food with Respect to Health and Safety Concerns among Adolescents," MPRA Paper 93570, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Noppadol Phaosathianphan & Adisorn Leelasantitham, 2019. "Understanding the Adoption Factors Influence on the Use of Intelligent Travel Assistant (ITA) for Eco-Tourists: An Extension of the UTAUT," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(08), pages 1-26, December.
    11. Garcia Martinez, Marian, 2017. "Inspiring crowdsourcing communities to create novel solutions: Competition design and the mediating role of trust," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 296-304.
    12. Wayne H. Stewart Jr. & Ruth C. May & Donna E. Ledgerwood, 2015. "Do You Know What I Know? Intent to Share Knowledge in the US and Ukraine," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 55(6), pages 737-773, December.
    13. Paul Benjamin Lowry & Jun Zhang & Chuang Wang & Mikko Siponen, 2016. "Why Do Adults Engage in Cyberbullying on Social Media? An Integration of Online Disinhibition and Deindividuation Effects with the Social Structure and Social Learning Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 962-986, December.
    14. Wu, Jih-Hwa & Cheng, Chih-Ming & Cheng, Po-Jen, 2015. "Behavioral intention toward urban eco-land performance assessment models using TPB tests," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(4), pages 771-776.
    15. Josephine Bremer & Martina K. Linnenluecke, 2017. "Determinants of the perceived importance of organisational adaptation to climate change in the Australian energy industry," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 42(3), pages 502-521, August.
    16. Girod, Bastien & Mayer, Sebastian & Nägele, Florian, 2017. "Economic versus belief-based models: Shedding light on the adoption of novel green technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 415-426.
    17. Chin, Amita Goyal & Harris, Mark A. & Brookshire, Robert, 2018. "A bidirectional perspective of trust and risk in determining factors that influence mobile app installation," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 49-59.
    18. Kristijan Mirkovski & Chunxiao Yin & Libo Liu & Jinbi Yang, 2019. "Exploring the Contingent Effect of Community Equity on Users’ Intention to Share Information," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 845-860, August.
    19. Krittinee Nuttavuthisit & John Thøgersen, 2017. "The Importance of Consumer Trust for the Emergence of a Market for Green Products: The Case of Organic Food," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 323-337, January.
    20. Teerapong Pienwisetkaew & Peerapong Wongthahan & Phaninee Naruetharadhol & Sasichakorn Wongsaichia & Chonnipa Vonganunsuntree & Siraphat Padthar & Santi Nee & Ping He & Chavis Ketkaew, 2022. "Consumers’ Intention to Purchase Functional Non-Dairy Milk and Gender-Based Market Segmentation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-25, September.

    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:38:y:2018:i:9:p:1904-1920. 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.