Consumer perception and understanding of risk from food

British Medical Bulletin

Volumn 56, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 97-109

  Knox, Barbara ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ULSTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BOVINE SPONGIFORM ENCEPHALOPATHY; CONSUMER; FOOD SAFETY; GENETIC ENGINEERING; HUMAN; PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 0034040692     PISSN: 00071420     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/0007142001903003     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. Raats M, Sparks P. Unrealistic optimism about diet-related risks: implications for interventions. Proc Nutr Soc 1995; 54: 737-45
2. Tait J. Public perception of biotechnology hazards. J Chem Tech Biotechnol 1988; 43, 368-72
3. Payson S. Using historical information to identify consumer concerns about food safety. Technological Bulletin US Department of Agriculture 1994; 1835: 1-19
4. Khaneman D, Taversky A. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 1979; 47: 263-91
5. Hamburger H. Games as Models of Social Phenomena. San Francisco: WH Freeman, 1979
6. Sato Y. Special issue on social action and structure. Social Theory Methods 1999; 13: 155-68
7. Govindasamy R, Italia J. Predicting consumer risk perceptions towards pesticide residue: alogistic analysis. Appl Econom Lett 1998; 5: 793-6
8. Rai S, Krewski D. Uncertainty and variability analysis in multiplicative risk models. Risk Analysis 1998; 18: 37-45
9. Starr C. Social benefit versus technological risk. What is our society willing to pay for safety? Science 1969; 165: 1232-8
10. Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichenstein S. Rating the risks. Environment 1979; 21: 14-39
11. Weinstein N, Klein W. Resistance of personal risk perceptions to debiasing interventions. Health Psychol 1995; 14: 132-40
12. Frewer L, Howard C, Hedderley D, Shepherd R. What determines trust in information about food related risks? Underlying psychological constructs. Risk Analysis 1996; 16: 473-86
13. Sparks P, Shepherd R. Public perceptions of the potential hazards associated with food production and food consumption: an empirical study. Risk Analysis 1994; 14: 799-805
14. Frewer L, Shepherd R, Sparks P. The interrelationship between perceived knowledge, control and risk associated with a range of food-related hazards targeted at the individual, other people and society. J Food Safety 1994; 14: 19-40
15. Frewer L, Howard C, Hedderly D, Shepherd R. Methodological approaches to assessing risk perceptions associated with food-related hazards. Risk Analysis 1998; 18: 95-102
16. Brehm J. A Theory of Psychological Reaction. New York: Academic Press, 1966
17. Brown J. Introduction: approaches, tools and perceptions. In: Brown J. (Ed) Environmental Threats: Perception, Analysis and Management. London: Belhaven Press, 1989
18. Wynne B. Frameworks of rationality in risk management: towards the testing of naïve sociology. In: Brown J, (Ed) Environmental Threats: Perception, Analysis and Management. London: Belhaven Press, 1989
19. Sjoberg L. A discussion of the limitations of the psychometric and cultural theory approaches to risk perception. Radiat Protect Dosimetry 1996; 68: 219-225
20. Sjoberg L. Worry and risk perception. Risk Analysis 1998; 18: 85-93
21. Urban D, Hoban T. Cognitive determinants of risk perceptions associated with biotechnology. Scientometrics 1997; 40: 299-331
22. Freudenburg W, Pastor S. Public responses to technological risk: toward a sociological perspective. Social Q 1992; 33: 389-412
23. Kasperson R, Renn O, Brown HS et al. The social amplification of risk: a conceptual framework. Risk Analysis 1988; 8: 177-87
24. Freudenburg W. Risk and recreancy: Weber, the division of labour, and the rationality of risk decisions. Social Forces 1993; 71: 909-32
25. Jasanoff S. Civilization and madness: the great BSE scare of 1996. Public Understand Sci 1997; 6: 221-32
26. Rogers G. The dynamics of risk perception: how does perceived risk respond to risk events? Risk Analysis 1997; 17: 745-57
27. Douglas M. Risk Acceptability According to the Social Sciences. London: Routledge, Kegan Paul, 1985
28. Plutzer E, Maney A, O'Connor R. Ideology and elites' perceptions of the safety of new technologies. Am J Politic Sci 1998; 42: 190-209
29. Douglas M. Essays in the Sociology of Perception. London: Routledge, Kegan Paul, 1982
30. Fiddes M. Meat: A Natural Symbol. London: Routledge, 1991
31. Dholakia U. An investigation of the relationship between perceived risk and product involvement. Adv Consumer Res 1997; 24: 159-67
32. Schutz H, Weidmann P. Judgments of personal and environmental risks of consumer products - do they differ? Risk Analysis 1998; 18: 119-29
33. Chaudhuri A. Product class effects on perceived risk: the role of emotion. Int J Res Marketing 1998; 15: 157-68
34. Keane A, Willets A. Concepts of Healthy Eating: An Anthropological Investigation in South East London. Goldsmiths: University of London, 1996
35. Grove-White R, MacNaughton P, Mayer S, Wynne B. Uncertain world: genetically modified organisms. In: University of Lancaster. Food, Public Attitudes in Britain. Lancaster: Centre for the Study of Environmental Change (CSEC), 1997
36. Davies S. Gene Cuisine - a consumer agenda for genetically modified foods. Consumers' Association Policy Report. London: Consumers' Association, 1997
37. Burke D. What biotechnology can do for the food industry. Food Sci Technol Today 1997; 11: 202-9
38. Sheppard J. Spilling the genes - what we should know about genetically engineered foods. Splice of Life Publication. London: The Genetic Forum, 1996
39. Kusnesof S, Ritson C. Consumer acceptability of genetically modified foods with special reference to farmed salmon. Br Food J 1996; 98: 39-47
40. Shapiro R. How genetic engineering will save our planet. Futurist 1999; 33/34: 28-9
41. Clarke A. The impact of biotechnology in a changing world. Aust Biotechnol 1996; 7: 96-100
42. Jones L. Food biotechnology: current developments and the need for awareness. Nutr Food Sci 1996; 6: 5-11
43. Rabino I. Ethical debates in genetic engineering: US scientists attitudes on patenting, germ-line research, food labelling, and agri-biotech issues. Politics Life Sci 1998; 17: 147-63
44. International Food Information Council (IFIC) Consumer confidence in biotechnology. Current FDA Labelling Policy. Aust Biotechnol 1997; 7: 101
45. Saint V. Objectives and purpose of consumer information in Community legislation. Eur Food Law Rev 1997; 4: 377-87
46. Frewer L. Trust and risk communication. Health, AIR-CAT 4th Plenary Meeting: Ecological, Safety Aspects in Food Choice 1988; 4: 10-5
47. Petty R, Cacioppo J. Attitudes, Persuasion: Classic, Contemporary Approaches. USA: William Brown, 1981
48. Frewer L, Howard C, Hedderley D, Shepherd R. The elaboration likelihood model and communication about food risks. Risk Analysis 1997; 17: 759-70
49. Frewer L, Howard C, Hedderley D, Shepherd R. Reactions to information about genetic engineering: impact of source characteristics, perceived personal relevance, and persuasiveness. Public Understanding Sci 1999; 8: 35-50
50. Lin J. Demographic and socio-economic influences on the importance of food safety. Agr Resource Econom Rev 1995; 24: 190-8
51. Raats M, Sparks P. Unrealistic optimism about diet related risks: implications for interventions. Proc Nutr Soc 1995; 54: 737-45