Consumer attitudes towards different food-processing technologies used in cheese production - The influence of consumer benefit

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 8, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 271-280

  Frewer, L J ^a   Howard, C ^a   Hedderley, D ^a   Shepherd, R ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF FOOD RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Conjoint analysis; Consumer attitudes; Genetic engineering

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA;

EID: 0031008239     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/s0950-3293(97)00002-5     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Antilla, M., Van den Heuval, R. R. and Moller, K. (1980) Conjoint measurement for marketing management. European Journal of Marketing 14, 397-408.
2. Bass, F. M. and Wilkie, W. L. (1973) A comparative analysis of attitudinal predictions of brand preference. Journal of Marketing Research 10, 262-269.
3. Deliza, R. Rosenthal, A., Hedderley, D. and Frewer, L. J. (in preparation). The importance of brand, product information and process in the development of novel environmentally friendly vegetable oils.
4. Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P. and Lichtenstein, S. (1982) Lay foibles and expert fables in judgements about risk. American Statistics 36, 240-255.
5. Frewer, L. J., Hedderley, D. Howard, C and Shepherd, R. (In press) 'Objection' mapping in determining group and individual concerns regarding genetic engineering. Agriculture and human values.
6. Frewer, L. J., Howard, C. and Shepherd, R. (1996) The influence of realistic product exposure on attitudes towards genetic engineering of foodstuffs. Food Quality and Preference 7, 61-67.
7. Frewer, L. J., Howard, C. and Shepherd, R. (1997) Public concerns in the UK about general and specific applications of genetic engineering: risk, benefit and ethics. Science, Technology and Human Values 22, 4.
8. Green, P. E. and Carmone, F. J. (1970) Multidimensional scaling and related techniques in marketing analysis. Allyn and Bacon, Boston.
9. Green, P. E. and Rao, V. R. (1971) Conjoint measurement for quantifying judgemental data. Journal Of Marketing Research 8, 355-363.
10. Green, P. E. and Srinivasan, V. (1978) Conjoint analysis in consumer research: Issues and outlook. Journal of Consumer Research 5, 103-123.
11. Hamstra, A. M. (1993) Consumer acceptance of food biotechnology: the relationship between product evaluation and acceptance. Research report 137. SWOKA, Institute for Consumer Research, The Hague.
12. Hamstra, A. M. and Smink, C. (1996) Consumers and biotechnology in the Netherlands. British Food Journal 98(Suppl. 4), 34-38.
13. Hedderley, D. and Wakeling, I. (1995) A comparison of imputation techniques for internal preference mapping, using Monte Carlo simulation. Food Quality and Preference 6, 281-297.
14. Heijs, W. J. M., Midden, C. J. H. and Drabbe, R. A. J. (1993) Biotechnology: Attitudes and influencing factors. Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven.
15. Hoban, T. J. and Kendall, P. A. (1992) Consumer attitudes about the use of biotechnology in agriculture and food production. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, N.C.
16. Krantz, D. H. and Tversky, A. (1971) Conjoint - measurement analysis of composition rules in psychology. Psychological Review 78, 151-169.
17. Knudsen, I. and Ovesen, L. (1994) Assessment of novel foods: a call for a new and broader GRAS concept. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharnacology 21, 365-369.
18. Kuznesof, S. and Ritson, C. (1996) Consumer acceptability of genetically modified foods with special reference to farmed fish. British Food Journal 98, 39-47.
19. Law, B. A. and Mullholland, F. (1995) Enzymology of lactoccoci in relation to flavour development from milk proteins. International Dairy Journal 5, 833-854.
20. Logothetis, N. and Wynn, H. I. (1989) Quality through design. Offline quality control and taguchies contributions. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
21. Marlier, E. (1992) Eurobarometer 35.1: opinions of Europeans on biotechnology in 1991. In Biotechnology in public: a review of recent research, ed. J. Durant, pp. 52-108. Science Museum for the European Federation of Biotechnology, London.
22. Polkinghorne, J. (1993) Report of the committee on the ethics of genetic modification and food use. H.M.S.O., London.
23. Rifkin, J. (1985) Declaration of a heretic. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
24. Sloof, M., Tijskens, L. M. M. and Wilkinson, E. C. (1996) Concepts for modelling the quality of perishable products. Trends in Food Science and Technology 71, 165-171.
25. Sparks, P., Shepherd, R. and Frewer, L. J. (1995) Assessing and structuring attitudes towards the use of gene technology in food production: the role of perceived ethical obligation. Journal of Basic and Applied Social Psychology 16(Suppl. 3), 267-285.
26. Straughan, R. and Reiss, M. (1996) Improving nature? The science and ethics of genetic engineering. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
27. Steenkamp, J. B. E. M. (1987) Conjoint measurement in ham quality evaluation. Journal of Agricultural Economics 38, 473-480.
28. Zechendorf, B. (1994) What the public thinks about biotechnology. Bio/Technology 12, 870-875.