What Influences Consumer Evaluation of Genetically Modified Foods?
Genetically modified (GM) foods have attracted a great deal of controversy. While some consumers and organizations regard GM foods as safe, many other consumers and organizations remain concerned about their potential health risks. The results of three studies suggest that consumers respond differen...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of public policy & marketing 2019-04, Vol.38 (2), p.263-279 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 279 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 263 |
container_title | Journal of public policy & marketing |
container_volume | 38 |
creator | Pham, Nguyen Mandel, Naomi |
description | Genetically modified (GM) foods have attracted a great deal of controversy. While some consumers and organizations regard GM foods as safe, many other consumers and organizations remain concerned about their potential health risks. The results of three studies suggest that consumers respond differently to persuasive messages regarding GM foods on the basis of their preexisting attitudes. Weak anti-GM consumers tend to comply with a variety of pro-GM messages. In contrast, strong anti-GM consumers exhibit message-opposing behavior. Moreover, they respond just as negatively to a safety message (claiming that GM foods are safe) as to a risk message (claiming that GM foods are unsafe). The mechanism underlying these effects is consumers’ perceived health risk. A benefit message claiming that GM foods are beneficial (e.g., more nutritious than their conventional counterparts) is a better alternative for strong anti-GM consumers. Finally, the results suggest that persuasive messages do not significantly change pro-GM consumers’ evaluations of these foods. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0743915618818168 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2197840380</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26992892</jstor_id><sage_id>10.1177_0743915618818168</sage_id><sourcerecordid>26992892</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-e5b16444d0ca4b5d5a81676a7019832d1f7a829813878805da55234c996d2e4e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM9LwzAcxYMoWKd3L0LAczXf_GiSk-jY5mDiRfFYsibVjq6ZSSvsv7el4sCDp-_hfd57Xx5Cl0BuAKS8JZIzDSIDpUBBpo5QAoLLVFIij1EyyOmgn6KzGDeEEACmEvTw9mFavGzKunNN4SKe-iZ2Wxfw7MvUnWkr32Bf4oVrXFsVpq73-MnbqqycxXPvbbw7RyelqaO7-LkT9DqfvUwf09XzYjm9X6UFU6pNnVhDxjm3pDB8Laww_ZsyM5KAVoxaKKVRVKv-LakUEdYIQRkvtM4sddyxCboec3fBf3YutvnGd6HpK3MKWipOmCI9RUaqCD7G4Mp8F6qtCfscSD4slf9dqrfg0eIK31TxYJAZYQyADqnpiETz7g69_0Rejfwmtj78JtJMa6o0Zd8HYnnG</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2197840380</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>What Influences Consumer Evaluation of Genetically Modified Foods?</title><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><creator>Pham, Nguyen ; Mandel, Naomi</creator><creatorcontrib>Pham, Nguyen ; Mandel, Naomi</creatorcontrib><description>Genetically modified (GM) foods have attracted a great deal of controversy. While some consumers and organizations regard GM foods as safe, many other consumers and organizations remain concerned about their potential health risks. The results of three studies suggest that consumers respond differently to persuasive messages regarding GM foods on the basis of their preexisting attitudes. Weak anti-GM consumers tend to comply with a variety of pro-GM messages. In contrast, strong anti-GM consumers exhibit message-opposing behavior. Moreover, they respond just as negatively to a safety message (claiming that GM foods are safe) as to a risk message (claiming that GM foods are unsafe). The mechanism underlying these effects is consumers’ perceived health risk. A benefit message claiming that GM foods are beneficial (e.g., more nutritious than their conventional counterparts) is a better alternative for strong anti-GM consumers. Finally, the results suggest that persuasive messages do not significantly change pro-GM consumers’ evaluations of these foods.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0743-9156</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1547-7207</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0743915618818168</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc</publisher><subject>Attitudes ; Consumers ; Food ; Genetically altered foods ; Health risks ; Persuasion ; Safety ; Smuggling ; Special Issue Research Articles</subject><ispartof>Journal of public policy & marketing, 2019-04, Vol.38 (2), p.263-279</ispartof><rights>American Marketing Association 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-e5b16444d0ca4b5d5a81676a7019832d1f7a829813878805da55234c996d2e4e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-e5b16444d0ca4b5d5a81676a7019832d1f7a829813878805da55234c996d2e4e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26992892$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26992892$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,21798,27843,27901,27902,43597,43598,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pham, Nguyen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mandel, Naomi</creatorcontrib><title>What Influences Consumer Evaluation of Genetically Modified Foods?</title><title>Journal of public policy & marketing</title><description>Genetically modified (GM) foods have attracted a great deal of controversy. While some consumers and organizations regard GM foods as safe, many other consumers and organizations remain concerned about their potential health risks. The results of three studies suggest that consumers respond differently to persuasive messages regarding GM foods on the basis of their preexisting attitudes. Weak anti-GM consumers tend to comply with a variety of pro-GM messages. In contrast, strong anti-GM consumers exhibit message-opposing behavior. Moreover, they respond just as negatively to a safety message (claiming that GM foods are safe) as to a risk message (claiming that GM foods are unsafe). The mechanism underlying these effects is consumers’ perceived health risk. A benefit message claiming that GM foods are beneficial (e.g., more nutritious than their conventional counterparts) is a better alternative for strong anti-GM consumers. Finally, the results suggest that persuasive messages do not significantly change pro-GM consumers’ evaluations of these foods.</description><subject>Attitudes</subject><subject>Consumers</subject><subject>Food</subject><subject>Genetically altered foods</subject><subject>Health risks</subject><subject>Persuasion</subject><subject>Safety</subject><subject>Smuggling</subject><subject>Special Issue Research Articles</subject><issn>0743-9156</issn><issn>1547-7207</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kM9LwzAcxYMoWKd3L0LAczXf_GiSk-jY5mDiRfFYsibVjq6ZSSvsv7el4sCDp-_hfd57Xx5Cl0BuAKS8JZIzDSIDpUBBpo5QAoLLVFIij1EyyOmgn6KzGDeEEACmEvTw9mFavGzKunNN4SKe-iZ2Wxfw7MvUnWkr32Bf4oVrXFsVpq73-MnbqqycxXPvbbw7RyelqaO7-LkT9DqfvUwf09XzYjm9X6UFU6pNnVhDxjm3pDB8Laww_ZsyM5KAVoxaKKVRVKv-LakUEdYIQRkvtM4sddyxCboec3fBf3YutvnGd6HpK3MKWipOmCI9RUaqCD7G4Mp8F6qtCfscSD4slf9dqrfg0eIK31TxYJAZYQyADqnpiETz7g69_0Rejfwmtj78JtJMa6o0Zd8HYnnG</recordid><startdate>20190401</startdate><enddate>20190401</enddate><creator>Pham, Nguyen</creator><creator>Mandel, Naomi</creator><general>Sage Publications, Inc</general><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>OQ6</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20190401</creationdate><title>What Influences Consumer Evaluation of Genetically Modified Foods?</title><author>Pham, Nguyen ; Mandel, Naomi</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c388t-e5b16444d0ca4b5d5a81676a7019832d1f7a829813878805da55234c996d2e4e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Attitudes</topic><topic>Consumers</topic><topic>Food</topic><topic>Genetically altered foods</topic><topic>Health risks</topic><topic>Persuasion</topic><topic>Safety</topic><topic>Smuggling</topic><topic>Special Issue Research Articles</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pham, Nguyen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mandel, Naomi</creatorcontrib><collection>ECONIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Journal of public policy & marketing</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pham, Nguyen</au><au>Mandel, Naomi</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>What Influences Consumer Evaluation of Genetically Modified Foods?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of public policy & marketing</jtitle><date>2019-04-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>263</spage><epage>279</epage><pages>263-279</pages><issn>0743-9156</issn><eissn>1547-7207</eissn><abstract>Genetically modified (GM) foods have attracted a great deal of controversy. While some consumers and organizations regard GM foods as safe, many other consumers and organizations remain concerned about their potential health risks. The results of three studies suggest that consumers respond differently to persuasive messages regarding GM foods on the basis of their preexisting attitudes. Weak anti-GM consumers tend to comply with a variety of pro-GM messages. In contrast, strong anti-GM consumers exhibit message-opposing behavior. Moreover, they respond just as negatively to a safety message (claiming that GM foods are safe) as to a risk message (claiming that GM foods are unsafe). The mechanism underlying these effects is consumers’ perceived health risk. A benefit message claiming that GM foods are beneficial (e.g., more nutritious than their conventional counterparts) is a better alternative for strong anti-GM consumers. Finally, the results suggest that persuasive messages do not significantly change pro-GM consumers’ evaluations of these foods.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>Sage Publications, Inc</pub><doi>10.1177/0743915618818168</doi><tpages>17</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0743-9156 |
ispartof | Journal of public policy & marketing, 2019-04, Vol.38 (2), p.263-279 |
issn | 0743-9156 1547-7207 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2197840380 |
source | SAGE Complete A-Z List; Jstor Complete Legacy; PAIS Index; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete |
subjects | Attitudes Consumers Food Genetically altered foods Health risks Persuasion Safety Smuggling Special Issue Research Articles |
title | What Influences Consumer Evaluation of Genetically Modified Foods? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T02%3A16%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=What%20Influences%20Consumer%20Evaluation%20of%20Genetically%20Modified%20Foods?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20public%20policy%20&%20marketing&rft.au=Pham,%20Nguyen&rft.date=2019-04-01&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=263&rft.epage=279&rft.pages=263-279&rft.issn=0743-9156&rft.eissn=1547-7207&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0743915618818168&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E26992892%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2197840380&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=26992892&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0743915618818168&rfr_iscdi=true |