Examining consumer behavior toward genetically modified (GM) food in Britain

Risk Analysis

Volumn 26, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 657-670

  Spence, Alexa ^a   Townsend, Ellen ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Behavior; Contingent valuation task; GM foods; Intentions; Theory of planned behavior

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; COSTS; GENETIC ENGINEERING; PERSONNEL; SOCIAL ASPECTS;

BEHAVIOR; CONTINGENT VALUATION TASK; GM FOODS; INTENTIONS; THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOR;

FOOD PRODUCTS;

CONSUMPTION BEHAVIOR; FOOD SELECTION; GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISM;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR MODIFICATION; CONSUMER ATTITUDE; CONTINGENT VALUATION; EMOTIONAL ATTACHMENT; EMOTIONALITY; FEMALE; GENETICALLY MODIFIED CROP; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; MALE; MORALITY; NORMAL HUMAN; PERCEPTION; PREDICTIVE VALIDITY; SELF CONCEPT; SELF EVALUATION; THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOR; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ATTITUDE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; FEMALE; FOOD PREFERENCES; FOOD, GENETICALLY MODIFIED; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PUBLIC OPINION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

EURASIA; EUROPE; UNITED KINGDOM; WESTERN EUROPE;

EID: 33745389580     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00777.x     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Ajzen, I. (1988). Models of human social behaviour and their application to health psychology. Psychology and Health, 13, 735 739.
2. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179 211.
3. Ajzen, I. (2002). Constructing a TPB Questionnaire: Conceptual and Methodological Considerations. Available at http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/ ∼aizen/.
4. Anderson, K., & Jackson, L. A. (2003). Why are US and EU policies toward GMOs so different? AgBioForum, 6, 95 100. Available at http://www.agbioforum.org.
5. Bateman, I., Munro, A., Rhodes, B., Starmer, C., & Sugden, R. (1997). A test of the theory of reference-dependent preferences. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112, 479 505.
6. Bredahl, L., Grunert, K., & Frewer, L. (1998). Consumer attitudes and decision-making with regard to genetically engineered food products. A review of the literature and a presentation of models for future research. Journal of Consumer Policy, 21, 251 277.
7. Bromiley, P., & Curley, S. P. (1992). Individual differences in risk taking. In J. F. Yates (Ed. Risk Taking Behaviour (pp. 87 132). Chichester : John Wiley & Sons.
8. Campbell, S., & Townsend, E. (2003). Flaws undermine results of UK biotech debate. Nature, 425, 559.
9. Conner, M., & Armitage, C. J. (1998). Extending the theory of planned behaviour: A review and avenues for further research. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1429 1464.
10. Conner, M., & McMillan, B. (1999). Interaction effects in the theory of planned behaviour: Studying cannabis use. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 195 222.
11. Cook, A. J., Kerr, G. N., & Moore, K. (2002). Attitudes and intentions towards purchasing GM food. Journal of Economic Psychology, 23, 557 572.
12. Dovidio, J., Gaertner, S., & Kawakami, K. (2002). Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 62 68.
13. Fazio, R., & Olson, M. (2003). Implicit measures in social cognition research: Their meaning and use. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 297 327.
14. Gaskell, G. (2004). Science policy and society: The British debate over GM agriculture. Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 15, 241 245.
15. Gaskell, G., Allun, N., Bauer, M., Durant, J., Allansdottir, A., Bonfadelli, H., Boy, D., Ceveigne, S., Fjaestad, B., Gutteling, J., Hampel, J., Jelsoe, E., Jesuino, J., Kohring, M., Kronberger, N., Midden, C., Nielsen, T., Przestalski, A., Rusanen, T., Sakellaris, G., Torgerse, H., Twardowski, T., & Wagner, W. (2000). Biotechnology and the European public. Nature Biotechnology, 18, 935 938.
16. Gaskell, G., Allum, N., & Stares, S. (2003). Europeans and Biotechnology in 2002: Eurobarometer 58.0. Brussels : European Commission.
17. Gaskell, G., Bauer, M. W., Durant, J., & Allum, N. C. (2003). Worlds apart? The reception of genetically modified foods in Europe and the U.S. Science, 285, 384 387.
18. Grant, M., Bradley, A., Carmichael, A., Dale, P., Devereux, C., Grove-White, R., Hann, J., Hudson, L., Kass, G., Maxwell, J., & Rylott, P. (2003). GM Nation: The Findings of the Public Debate. Available at http://www.gmnation.org.uk.
19. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1463 1480.
20. Haahr, M. (2000). True Random Number Service. Available at http://www.Random.org.
21. Lahteenmaki, L., Grunert, K., Ueland, O., Astrom, A., Arvola, A., & Bech-Larson, T. (2002). Food Quality and Preference, 13, 523 533.
22. Magnusson, M. K., & Hursti, U. K. (2002). Consumer attitudes towards genetically modified foods. Appetite, 39, 9 24.
23. Mitchell, R., & Carson, R. (1989). Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington, DC : Resources for the Future.
24. Moon, W., & Balasubramanian, S. (2003). Willingness to pay for non-biotech foods in the U.S. and U.K. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 37, 317 339.
25. Noussair, C., Robin, S., & Ruffieux, B. (2001). Genetically Modified Organisms in the Food Supply: Public Opinion vs Consumer Behaviour. Purdue University Working Paper, January 2001.
26. Noussair, C., Robin, S., & Ruffieux, B. (2004). Do consumers really refuse to buy genetically modified food? Economic Journal, 114, 102 120.
27. O'Connor, R. C., & Armitage, C. J. (2003). Theory of planned behaviour and parasuicide: An exploratory study. Current Psychology: Developmental, Learning, Personality, Social 22, 196 205.
28. Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannebaum, P. H. (1957). The Measurement of Meaning. Urbana, IL : University of Illinois Press.
29. Poortinga, W., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2004). Public Perceptions of Genetically Modified Food and Crops, and the GM Nation? Public Debate on the Commercialisation of Agricultural Biotechnology in the UK (Understanding Risk Working Paper 04-01). Norwich : Centre for Environmental Risk.
30. Poortinga, W., & Pigeon, N. (2004). Trust, the asymmetry principle, and the role of prior beliefs. Risk Analysis, 24, 1475 1486.
31. Saba, A., & Vassallo, M. (2002). Consumer attitudes toward the use of gene technology in tomato production. Food Quality and Preference, 13, 13 21.
32. Shepherd, R. (1999). Social determinants of food choice. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 58, 807 812.
33. Shogren, J., Shin, S., Hayes, D., & Kliebenstein, J. (1994). Resolving differences in willingness to pay and willingness to accept. American Economic Review, 84, 255 269.
34. Siegrist, M. (2000). The influence of trust and perceptions of risk and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Analysis, 20, 195 203.
35. Simonson, I. (1992). The influence of anticipating regret and responsibility on purchase decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 105 118.
36. Sparks, P., & Guthrie, C. (1998). Self-identity and the theory of planned behaviour: A useful addition or an unhelpful artifice? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1393 1410.
37. Sparks, P., & Shepherd, R. (2002). The role of moral judgments within expectancy-value-based attitude-behaviour models. Ethics and Behaviour, 12, 299 321.
38. Sparks, P., Shepherd, R., & Frewer, L. (1995). 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, 267 285.
39. Strahan, R., & Gerbasi, K. C. (1972). Short, homogeneous versions of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 28, 191 193.
40. Terry, D. J., Hogg, M. A., & White, K. M. (1999). The theory of planned behaviour: Self identity, social identity and group norms. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 225 244.
41. Townsend, E., & Campbell, S. (2004). Psychological determinants of willingness to taste and purchase GM food. Risk Analysis, 24, 1385 1393.
42. Townsend, E., Clarke, D., & Travis, B. (2004). Effects of context and feelings on perceptions of genetically modified food. Risk Analysis, 24, 1369 1384.
43. Venkatachalam, L. (2004). The contingent valuation method: A review. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 24, 89 124.