Effects of information from sources in conflict and in consensus on perceptions of genetically modified food

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 460-469

  Dean, Moira ^a   Shepherd, Richard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SURREY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Conflict; Consensus; Genetically modified food; Risk communication

Indexed keywords

EID: 33749986476     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2006.05.004     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Breakwell G.M., and Barnett J. The significance of uncertainty and conflict: Developing a social psychological theory of risk communication. New Review of Social Psychology 2 (2003) 107-114
2. Covello V.T. Risk communication. In: Calow P. (Ed). Handbook of environmental risk assessment and management (1997), Blackwell Science, Oxford
3. Dean, M. S. (2000). Contested innovation: influence of conflict on perceptions of genetically modified food. Unpublished PhD., University of Surrey. UK.
4. Einhorn H.J., and Hogarth R.M. Ambiguity and uncertainty in probabilistic inference. Psychological Review 92 (1985) 433-461
5. Frewer L.J., Howard C., Hedderley D., and Shepherd R. What determines trust in information about food-related risks? Underlying psychological constructs. Risk Analysis 16 (1996) 473-486
6. Frewer L.J., Howard C., Hedderley D., and Shepherd R. The elaboration likelihood model and communication about food risks. Risk Analysis 17 (1997) 759-770
7. Frewer L.J., Howard C., and Shepherd R. The influence of initial attitudes on responses to communication about genetic engineering in food production. Agriculture and Human Values 15 (1998) 15-30
8. Frewer L.J., Miles S., Brennan M., Kuznesof S., Ness M., and Ritson C. Public preferences for informed choice under conditions of risk uncertainty. Public Understanding of Science 11 (2002) 363-372
9. Frewer L.J., Scholderer J., and Bredahl L. Communication about risk and benefits of genetically modified foods: the mediating role of trust. Risk Analysis 23 (2003) 1117-1133
10. Frewer L.J., and Shepherd R. Attributing information to different sources: effects on the perceived qualities of information, on the perceived relevance of information, and on attitude formation. Public Understanding of Science 3 (1994) 385-401
11. Frewer L.J., and 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
12. Hovland C.I., and Weiss W. The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly 15 (1951) 635-650
13. Kasperson R.E., Golding D., and Tuler S. Social distrust as a factor in citing hazardous facilities and communicating risks. Journal of Social Issues 48 (1992) 161-187
14. Lofstedt R.E., and Renn O. The Brent Spar controversy: An example of risk communication gone wrong. Risk Analysis 17 (1997) 131-136
15. MacGregor D., Slovic P., Mason R.G., and Detweiler J. Perceived risks of radioactive waste transport through Oregon: Results of a statewide survey. Risk Analysis 14 (1994) 5-14
16. Miller N., and Campbell D.T. Recency and primacy in persuasion as a function of the timing of speeches and measurements. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 59 (1959) 1-9
17. Peters R.G., Covello V.T., and McCallum D.B. The determinants of trust and credibility in environmental risk communication: An empirical study. Risk Analysis 17 (1997) 43-54
18. Poortinga W., and Pidgeon N.F. Trust in risk regulation: cause or consequence of the acceptability of GM food?. Risk Analysis 25 (2005) 199-209
19. Ravetz J. Comments on lay views on uncertainty in environmental health risk assessment. Journal of Risk Research 2 (1999) 1-2
20. Renn O., and Levine D. Credibility and trust in risk communication. In: Kasperson R.E., and Stallen P.J.M. (Eds). Communicating risks to the public (1991), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands 175-218
21. Siegrist M., and Cvetkovich G. Better negative than positive? Evidence of a bias for negative information about possible health dangers. Risk Analysis 21 (2001) 199-206
22. Slovic P. Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis 13 (1993) 675-682
23. Smithson M. Conflict aversion: Preference for ambiguity vs conflict in sources and evidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 79 (1999) 179-198
24. Stone V.A., and Eswara H.S. The likeability and self-interest of the source in attitude change. Journalism Quarterly 46 (1969) 61-68
25. Viscusi W.K. Alarmist decisions with divergent risk information. The Economic Journal 107 (1997) 1657-1670