Consumers' cognitions with regard to genetically modified foods. Results of a qualitative study in four countries

Appetite

Volumn 33, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 343-360

  Bredahl, L ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

YOGHURT;

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; BEER; COGNITION; CONSUMER; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENMARK; DNA MODIFICATION; FOOD PROCESSING; GERMANY; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTERVIEW; ITALY; MORALITY; NORMAL HUMAN; RISK; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 0033371783     PISSN: 01956663     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/appe.1999.0267     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Bredahl L, Grunert K. G., Frewer L. J. Consumers and decision-making with regard to genetically modified food products - a review of the literature and a presentation of models for future research. Journal of Consumer Policy. 21:1988;251-277.
2. Brunsø K, Grunert K. G., Bredahl L. An analysis of national and cross-national consumer segments using the food-related lifestyle instrument in Denmark, France, Germany and Great Britain. Aarhus: The Aarhus School of Business. MAPP working paper no 35. 1996.
3. Carroll J. D., Green P. E., Schaffer C. M. Interpoint distance comparisons in correspondence analysis. Journal of Marketing Research. 23:1986;271-280.
4. European Commission. The Europeans and modern biotechnology. Eurobarometer 46.1. Luxenbourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. 1997.
5. Fishbein M. An investigation of the relationship between beliefs about an object and the attitude toward that object. Human Relations. 16:1963;233-239.
6. Fischoff B., Slovic P., Lichtenstein S., Read S., Combs B. How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits. Policy Sciences. 9:1978;127-152.
7. Frewer L. J., Shepherd R. Ethical concerns and risk perceptions associated with different applications of genetic engineering: Interrelationships with the perceived need for regulation of the technology. Agriculture and Human Values. 12:1995;48-57.
8. Frewer L. J., Howard C., Shepherd R. Public concerns in the United Kingdom about general and specific applications of genetic engineering: Risk, benefit, and ethics. Science, Technology & Human Values. 22:1997;98-124.
9. Grunert K. G., Grunert S. C. Measuring subjective meaning structures by the laddering method: Theoretical considerations and methodological problems. International Journal of Research in Marketing. 12:1995;209-225.
10. Gutman J. A means-end chain model based on consumer categorisation processes. Journal of Marketing. 46:1982;60-72.
11. Hamstra A. Consumer acceptance of model for food biotechnology - final report. The Hague: The SWOKA Institute. 1995.
12. Heijs W. J. M., Midden C. J. H. Biotechnology: attitudes and influencing factors, third survey. Eindhoven: Eindhoven University of Technology. 1995.
13. Olson J. C. Theoretical foundations of means-end chains. Werbeforschung and Praxis. 5:1989;174-178.
14. Reynolds T. J., Gutman J. Laddering theory, method, analysis and interpretation. Journal of Advertising Research. Feb./March:1988;11-31.
15. Scholderer J., Balderjahn I., Will S. Comunicating the risks and benefits of genetically engineered food products to the public: the view of experts from four European countries. Aarhus: The Aarhus School of Business. MAPP working paper no 57. 1998.
16. Sparks P., Guthrie C. A., Shepherd R. The dimensional structure of the perceived behavioural control construct. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 27:1997;418-438.
17. Sparks P., Shepherd R., Frewer L. J. Gene technology, food production, and public opinion: A UK study. Agriculture and Human Values. 11:1994;19-28.
18. Sparks P., Shepherd R., Frewer L. J. Assessing and structuring attitudes toward the use of gene technology in food production: The role of perceived ethical obligation. Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 16:1995;267-285.