Lay people's perception of food hazards: Comparing aggregated data and individual data

Appetite

Volumn 47, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 324-332

  Siegrist, Michael ^a,b   Keller, Carmen ^b   Kiers, Henk A L ^c  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Food hazards; Natural hazards; Psychometric paradigm; Risk perception; Three way component analysis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; COGNITION; DATA ANALYSIS; FOOD ANALYSIS; FOOD PREFERENCE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; PERCEPTION; PSYCHOMETRY; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; SWITZERLAND;

ADULT; AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; FEMALE; FOOD; FOOD PREFERENCES; HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERCEPTION; PSYCHOMETRICS; PUBLIC OPINION; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAFETY; SWITZERLAND;

EID: 33750996694     PISSN: 01956663     EISSN: 10958304     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2006.05.012     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Bronfman N.C., and Cifuentes L.A. Risk perception in a developing country: The case of Chile. Risk Analysis 23 (2003) 1271-1285
2. Fife-Schaw C., and Rowe G. Public perceptions of everyday food hazards: A psychometric study. Risk Analysis 16 (1996) 487-500
3. Fife-Schaw C., and Rowe G. Extending the application of the psychometric approach for assessing public perceptions of food risks: Some methodological considerations. Journal of Risk Research 3 (2000) 167-179
4. Fischhoff B., Slovic P., Lichtenstein S., Read S., and Combs B. How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits. Policy Sciences 9 (1978) 127-152
5. Hansen J., Holm L., Frewer L., Robinson P., and Sandoe P. Beyond the knowledge deficit: Recent research into lay and expert attitudes to food risks. Appetite 41 2 (2003) 111-121
6. Kiers H.A.L. Bootstrap confidence intervals for three-way methods. Journal of Chemometrics 18 (2004) 22-36
7. Kiers H.A.L., and Van Mechelen I. Three-way component analysis: Principles and illustrative application. Psychological Methods 6 (2001) 84-110
8. Kirk S.F.L., Greenwood D., Cade J.E., and Pearman A.D. Public perception of a range of potential food risks in the United Kingdom. Appetite 38 (2002) 189-197
9. Kroonenberg P.M., and De Leeuw J. Principal component analysis of three-mode data by means of alternating least squares algorithms. Psychometrika 45 (1980) 69-97
10. Lockie S., Lyons K., Lawrence G., and Grice J. Choosing organics: A path analysis of factors underlying the selection of organic food among Australian consumers. Appetite 43 (2004) 135-146
11. Magnusson M.K., Arvola A., Hursti UKK., Aberg L., and Sjoden P.O. Choice of organic foods is related to perceived consequences for human health and to environmentally friendly behaviour. Appetite 40 2 (2003) 109-117
12. Marris C., Langford I., Saunderson T., and O'Riordan T. Exploring the "Psychometric Paradigm": Comparisons between aggregate and individual analysis. Risk Analysis 17 (1997) 303-312
13. Rozin P. The meaning of "natural". Psychological Science 16 (2005) 652-658
14. Rozin P., Spranca M., Krieger Z., Neuhaus R., Surillo D., Swerdlin A., et al. Preference for natural: Instrumental and ideational/moral motivations, and the contrast between foods and medicines. Appetite 43 (2004) 147-154
15. Siegrist M., Keller C., and Kiers H.A.L. A new look at the psychometric paradigm of perception of hazards. Risk Analysis 25 (2005) 209-220
16. Sjöberg L. A discussion of the limitations of the psychometric and cultural theory approaches to risk perception. Radiation Protection Dosimetry 68 (1996) 219-225
17. Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science 236 (1987) 280-285
18. Sparks P., and Shepherd R. Public perceptions of the potential hazards associated with food production and food consumption: An empirical study. Risk Analysis 14 (1994) 799-806
19. Tenbült P., de Vries N.K., Dreezens E., and Martijn C. Perceived naturalness and acceptance of genetically modified food. Appetite 45 (2005) 47-50
20. Timmerman M.E., and Kiers H.A.L. Three mode principal component analysis: Indicating the numbers of components and sensitivity to local optima. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology 53 (2000) 1-16
21. Tucker L.R. Some mathematical notes on three-mode factor analysis. Psychometrika 31 (1966) 279-311
22. van Kleef E., van Trijp H.C.M., and Luning P. Functional foods: Health claim-food product compatibility and the impact of health claim framing on consumer evaluation. Appetite 44 (2005) 299-308
23. Van Mechelen I., and Kiers H.A.L. Individual differences in anxiety responses to stressful situations: A three-mode component analysis model. European Journal of Personality 13 (1999) 409-428
24. Verbeke W. Consumer acceptance of functional foods: Socio-demographic, cognitive and attitudinal determinants. Food Quality and Preference 16 1 (2005) 45-57
25. Verlegh P.W.J., and Candel M.J.J.M. The consumption of convenience foods: Reference groups and eating situations. Food Quality and Preference 10 6 (1999) 457-464
26. Vlek C., and Stallen P.-J. Judging risks and benefits in the small and in the large. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 28 (1981) 235-271
27. Willis H.H., DeKay M.L., Fischhoff B., and Morgan M.G. Aggregate, disaggregate, and hybrid analyses of ecological risk perceptions. Risk Analysis 25 (2005) 405-428