Consumer acceptance of technology-based food innovations: Lessons for the future of nutrigenomics

Appetite

Volumn 49, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 1-17

  Ronteltap, A ^a   van Trijp, J C M ^a   Renes, R J ^a   Frewer, L J ^a  

^a WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Adoption; Consumer acceptance; Food; Innovation; Nutrigenomics; Technology

Indexed keywords

CONSUMER; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FOOD HANDLING; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NUTRIGENOMICS; PERCEPTION; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT;

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY; CONSUMER SATISFACTION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FOOD TECHNOLOGY; FOOD, FORTIFIED; FOOD, GENETICALLY MODIFIED; HEALTH FOOD; HUMANS; NUTRITION PHYSIOLOGY; PERCEPTION; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 34248580517     PISSN: 01956663     EISSN: 10958304     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2007.02.002     Document Type: Review

References (107)

1. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Processes 50 (1991) 179-211
2. Bogue J., Coleman T., and Sorenson D. Determinants of consumers' dietary behaviour for health-enhancing foods. British Food Journal 107 1 (2005) 4-16
3. Bouwman L.I., Hiddink G.J., Koelen M.A., Korthals M., van't Veer P., and van Woerkum C. Personalized nutrition communication through ICT application: How to overcome the gap between potential effectiveness and reality. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 59 Suppl 1 (2005) S108-S116
4. Bouyer M., Bagdassarian S., Chaabanne S., and Mullet E. Personality correlates of risk perception. Risk Analysis 21 3 (2001) 457-465
5. Brashers D.E. Communication and uncertainty management. Journal of Communication 51 (2001) 477-497
6. Bredahl L. Determinants of consumer attitudes and purchase intentions with regard to genetically modified foods-results of a cross-national survey. Journal of Consumer Policy 24 (2001) 23-61
7. Burgess M.M. Starting on the right foot: Public consultation to inform issue definition in genome policy (No. DEG 002) (2003), W. Maurice Young Centre for Applied Ethics, Vancouver
8. Carayannis E.G., Gonzalez E., and Wetter J. The nature and dynamics of discontinuous and disruptive innovations from a learning and knowledge management perspective. In: Shavinina L.V. (Ed). The international handbook on innovation. 1st ed (2003), Elsevier Science Ltd, Oxford
9. Cardello A.V. Consumer concerns and expectations about novel food processing technologies: Effects on product liking. Appetite 40 (2003) 217-233
10. Cestre G., and Darmon R.Y. Assessing consumer preferences in the context of new product diffusion. International Journal of Research in Marketing 15 (1998) 123-135
11. Chadwick R. Nutrigenomics, individualism and public health. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 63 (2004) 161-166
12. Childs N.M., and Poryzees G.H. Foods that help prevent disease: Consumer attitudes and public implications. British Food Journal 100 9 (1998) 419-426
13. Choo H., Chung J.-E., and Pysarchik D.T. Antecedents to new food product purchasing behavior among innovator groups in India. European Journal of Marketing 38 5/6 (2004) 608-625
14. Cook A.J., Kerr G.N., and Moore K. Attitudes and intentions towards purchasing GM food. Journal of Economic Psychology 23 (2002) 557-572
15. Cook G., Pieri E., and Robbins P. The scientists think and the public feels: Expert perceptions of the discourse of GM food. Discourse and Society 15 (2004) 433-449
16. Coppens P., Fernandes da Silva M., and Pettman S. European regulations on nutraceuticals, dietary supplements and functional foods: A framework based on safety. Toxicology 221 (2006) 59-74
17. Costa M.C.d., Deliza R., Rosenthal A., Hedderley D., and Frewer L.J. Non conventional technologies and impact on consumer behavior. Trends in Food Science and Technology 11 (2000) 188-193
18. Cox D.N., Koster A., and Russell C.G. Predicting intentions to consume functional foods and supplements to offset memory loss using an adaptation of protection motivation theory. Appetite 43 1 (2004) 55-64
19. Dabholkar P.A., and Bagozzi R.P. An attitudinal model of technology-based self-service: Moderating effects of consumer traits and situational factors. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 30 3 (2002) 184-201
20. Dahlberg, T., Mallat, N., & Öörni, A. (2003). Trust enhanced technology acceptance model-consumer acceptance of mobile payment solutions. Paper presented at the Stockholm mobility roundtable, Stockholm.
21. Darby M.R., and Karni E. Free competition and the optimal amount of fraud. Journal of Law and Economics 16 1 (1973) 67-88
22. Davis F.D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly September (1989) 319-339
23. Deliza R., Rosenthal A., Hedderley D., MacFie H.J.H., and Frewer L.J. The importance of brand, product information and manufacturing process in the development of novel environmentally friendly vegetable oils. Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing 10 3 (1999) 67-77
24. Deliza R., Rosenthal A., and Silva A.L.S. Consumer attitude towards information on non conventional technology. Trends in Food Science and Technology 14 (2003) 43-49
25. Eiser J.R., Miles S., and Frewer L.J. Trust, perceived risk, and attitudes toward food technologies. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 32 11 (2002) 2423-2433
26. Fam K.S., Waller D.S., and Erdogan B.Z. The influence of religion on attitudes towards the advertising of controversial products. European Journal of Marketing 38 5/6 (2004) 537-555
27. Finucane M.L., Slovic P., Mertz C.K., Flynn J., and Satterfield T.A. Gender, race, and perceived risk: The 'white male' effect. Health, Risk & Society 2 2 (2000) 159-172
28. Fischer A.R.H., Jong A.E.I.d., Jonge R.D., Frewer L.J., and Nauta M.J. Improving food safety in the domestic environment: The need for a transdisciplinary approach. Risk Analysis 25 3 (2005) 503-517
29. 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
30. Florkowski W.J., Elnagheeb A.H., and Huang C.L. Risk perception and new food production technologies. Applied Economics Letters 5 (1998) 69-73
31. Fox J.A., Hayes D.J., and Shogren J.F. Consumer preferences for food irradiation: How favorable and unfavorable descriptions affect preferences for irradiated pork in experimental auctions. The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 24 1 (2002) 75-95
32. Frewer L.J. Societal issues and public attitudes towards genetically modified foods. Trends in Food Science and Technology 14 5-8 (2003) 319-332
33. Frewer L.J., Howard C., Hedderley D., and Shepherd R. Consumer attitudes towards different food-processing technologies used in cheese production-the influence of consumer benefit. Food quality and preference 8 4 (1997) 271-280
34. Frewer L.J., Howard C., Hedderley D., and Shepherd R. Reactions to information about genetic engineering: Impact of source characteristics, perceived personal relevance, and persuasiveness. Public understanding of science 8 (1999) 35-50
35. 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
36. Frewer L.J., Hunt S., Brennan M., Kuznesof S., Ness M., and Ritson C. The views of scientific experts on how the public conceptualize uncertainty. Journal of Risk Research 6 1 (2003) 75-85
37. Frewer L.J., Miles S., and Marsh R. The media and genetically modified foods: Evidence in support of social amplification of risk. Risk Analysis 22 (2002) 701-711
38. Frewer L.J., and Salter B. Public attitudes, scientific advice and the politics of regulatory policy: The case of BSE. Science and Public Policy 29 2 (2002) 137-145
39. Frewer L.J., Scholderer J., and Lambert N. Consumer acceptance of functional foods: Issues for the future. British Food Journal 105 10 (2003) 714-731
40. Gaskell G., Allum N., Bauer M., Durant J., Allansdottir A., Bonfadelli H., et al. Biotechnology and the European public. Nature Biotechnology 18 9 (2000) 935-938
41. Gaskell G., Bauer M.W., Durant J., and Allum N.C. Worlds apart?. The reception of genetically modified foods in Europe and the US Science 285 5426 (1999) 384-387
42. German J.B., Yeretzian C., and Watzke H.J. Personalizing foods for health and preference. Food Technology 58 12 (2004) 26-31
43. Greer T.H., and Murtaza M.B. Web personalization: The impact of perceived innovation characteristics on the intention to use personalization. Journal of Computer Information Systems 43 3 (2003) 50-55
44. Griffin R.J., and Dunwoody S. The relation of communication to risk judgment and preventive behavior related to lead in tap water. Health communication 12 1 (2000) 81-107
45. Grunert K.G. Consumer behaviour with regard to food innovations: Quality perception and decision-making. In: Jongen W.M.F., and Meulenberg M.T.G. (Eds). Innovations in agri-food systems-product quality and consumer acceptance (2005), Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen 399
46. Grunert K.G., Bech-Larsen T., Lähteenmäki L., Ueland Ø., and Åström A. Attitudes towards the use of GMOs in food production and their impact on buying intention: The role of positive sensory experience. Agribusiness 20 1 (2004) 95-107
47. Grunert K.G., Bredahl L., and Scholderer J. Four questions on European consumers' attitudes toward the use of genetic modification in food production. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies 4 (2003) 435-445
48. Hardy G. Nutraceuticals and functional foods: Introduction and meaning. Nutrition 16 7-8 (2000) 688-689
49. Henson S. Demand-side constraints on the introduction of new food technologies: The case of food irradiation. Food Policy 20 2 (1995) 111-127
50. Honkanen P., and Verplanken B. Understanding attitudes towards genetically modified food: The role of values and attitude strength. Journal of Consumer Policy 27 (2004) 401-420
51. Karahanna E., and Straub D.W. The psychological origins of perceived usefulness and ease-of-use. Information & Management 35 (1999) 237-250
52. Karat C.M., Brodie C., Karat J., Vergo J., and Alpert S.R. Personalizing the user experience on ibm.Com. IBM Systems Journal 42 4 (2003) 686-701
53. Klandermans B. Persuasive communication: Measures to overcome real-life social dilemmas. In: Liebrand W., Messick D., and Wilke H. (Eds). Social dilemmas: Theoretical issues and research findings (1992), Pergamom Press, Oxford
54. Kutz G. Nutrigenetic testing-Tests purchased from four web sites mislead consumers (No. GAO-06-977T) (2006), United States Government Accountability Office
55. Kwon, H. S., & Chidambaram, L. (2000). A test of the technology acceptance model-the case of cellular telephone adoption. Paper presented at the 33rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
56. Lähteenmäki L., Grunert K., Ueland O., Aström A., Arvola A., and Bech-Larsen T. Acceptability of genetically modified cheese presented as real product alternative. Food quality and preference 13 (2002) 223-533
57. Lam S.Y., and Parasuraman A. Individual-level determinants of consumers' adoption and usage of technological innovations-a propositional inventory. In: Malhotra N.K. (Ed). Review of marketing research Vol. 2 (2005), M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY 240
58. Laros F.J.M., and Steenkamp J.-B.E.M. Importance of fear in the case of genetically modified food. Psychology and Marketing 21 11 (2004) 889-908
59. Lee Y., Kozar K.A., and Larsen K.R.T. The technology acceptance model: Past, present, and future. Communications of AIS 12 50 (2003) 1-50
60. Legris P., Ingham J., and Collerette P. Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management 40 3 (2003) 191-204
61. Loureiro M.L., and Bugbee M. Enhanced gm foods: Are consumers ready to pay for the potential benefits of biotechnology?. The Journal of Consumer Affairs 39 1 (2005) 52-70
62. Magnusson M.K., and Koivisto-Hursti U.-K. Consumer attitudes towards genetically modified foods. Appetite 39 1 (2002) 9-24
63. Meuter M.L., Bitner M.J., Ostrom A.L., and Brown S.W. Choosing among alternative service delivery modes: An investigation of customer trial of self-service technologies. Journal of Marketing 69 2 (2005) 61-83
64. Miles S., and Frewer L.J. Investigating specific concerns about different food hazards. Food quality and preference 12 (2001) 47-61
65. Moreau C.P., Lehmann D.R., and Markman A.B. Entrenched knowledge structures and consumer response to new products. Journal of Marketing Research 37 8 (2001) 14-29
66. Müller M., and Kersten S. Nutrigenomics: Goals and strategies. Nature-Reviews 4 (2003) 315-322
67. Oliver D. The future of nutrigenomics-from the lab to the dining room (No. SR-889) (2005), Institute for the Future
68. Palmer C.G.S. Risk perception: Another look at the 'white male' effect. Health, Risk & Society 5 1 (2003) 71-83
69. Petty R.E., and Cacioppo J.T. The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In: Berkowitz L. (Ed). Advances in experimental social psychology Vol. 19 (1986), Academic Press, New York 123-205
70. Prislin R., Wood W., and Pool G.J. Structural consistency and the deduction of novel from existing attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 34 (1998) 66-89
71. Rimal A.P., McWatters K.H., Hashim I.B., and Fletcher S.M. Intended vs. Actual purchase behavior for irradiated beef: A simulated supermarket setup (sss) experiment. Journal of Food Products Marketing 10 4 (2004) 1-15
72. Rogers E.M. Diffusion of innovations. 4th ed (1995), Free Press, New York
73. Rogers E.M. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed (2003), Free Press, New York
74. Rozin P. Food is fundamental, fun, frightening, and far-reaching. Social Research 66 1 (1999) 9-30
75. Ryan B., and Gross N.C. The diffusion of hybrid seed corn in two iowa communities. Rural Sociology 8 (1943) 15-24
76. Saba A., and Vassallo M. Consumer attitudes toward the use of gene technology in tomato production. Food Quality and Preference 13 (2002) 13-21
77. Savadori L., Savio S., Nicotra E., Rumiati R., Finucane M., and Slovic P. Expert and public perception of risk from biotechnology. Risk Analysis 24 5 (2004) 1289-1299
78. Schmidt D.B. Consumer response to functional foods in the 21st century. AgBioForum 3 1 (2000) 266-271
79. Scholderer J., and Frewer L.J. The biotechnology communication paradox: Experimental evidence and the need for a new strategy. Journal of Consumer Policy 26 (2003) 125-157
80. Siegrist M. Belief in gene technology: The influence of environmental attitudes and gender. Personality and Individual Differences 24 6 (1998) 861-866
81. Siegrist M. The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Analysis 20 2 (2000) 195-203
82. Siegrist M., Cvetkovich G., and Roth C. Salient value similarity, social trust, and risk/benefit perception. Risk Analysis 20 3 (2000) 353-362
83. Simons H. Persuasion in society (2001), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks
84. Simonson I. Determinants of customers' responses to customized offers: Conceptual framework and research propositions. Journal of Marketing 69 (2005) 32-45
85. Sjöberg, L. (2004). Principles of risk perception applied to gene technology (No. 5 (special issue)): EMBO (European Molecular Biology Organisation).
86. Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science 236 4799 (1987) 280-285
87. Slovic P. Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: Surveying the risk-assessment battlefield. Risk Analysis 19 4 (1999) 689-701
88. Sparks P., and Shepherd R. Public perceptions of the potential hazards associated with food production and food consumption: An empirical study. Risk Analysis 14 5 (1994) 799-806
89. Sparks P., Shepherd R., and Frewer L.J. Gene technology, food production, and public opinion: A UK study. Agriculture and Human Values 11 1 (1994) 19-28
90. Starr C. Social benefit versus technological risk. Science 165 September (1969) 1232-1238
91. Stolt U.G., Liss P.-E., Svensson T., and Ludvigsson J. Attitudes to bioethical issues: A case study of a screening project. Social Science & Medicine 54 (2002) 1333-1344
92. Tanaka Y. Major psychological factors affecting acceptance of gene-recombination technology. Risk Analysis 24 6 (2004) 1575-1583
93. te Molder H.F.M., and Gutteling J. The issue of food genomics: About reluctant citizens and united experts. In: Est R.V., Hanssen L., and Crapels O. (Eds). Genes for your food, food for your genes: Societal issues and dilemmas in food genomics (2003), Rathenau Institute, Den Haag (Working document 92)
94. Tenbült P., de Vries N.K., Dreezens E., and Martijn C. Perceived naturalness and acceptance of genetically modified food. Appetite 45 (2005) 47-50
95. Titchener G.D., and Sapp S.G. A comparison of two approaches to understanding consumer opinions of biotechnology. Social Behavior and Personality 30 4 (2002) 373-382
96. Tornatzky L.G., and Klein K.J. Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption-implementation: A meta-analysis of findings. IEEE Transactions on engineering management EM-29 1 (1982) 28-45
97. Townsend E., and Campbell S. Psychological determinants of willingness to taste and purchase genetically modified food. Risk Analysis 24 5 (2004) 1385-1393
98. Tuorila H., Lähteenmäki L., Pohjalainen L., and Lotti L. Food neophobia among the Finns and related responses to familiar and unfamiliar foods. Food Quality and Preference 12 1 (2001)
99. Urala N., and Lähteenmäki L. Attitudes behind consumers' willingness to use functional foods. Food Quality and Preference 15 (2004) 793-809
100. van Dillen S.M.E., Hiddink G.J., Koelen M.A., de Graaf C., and van Woerkum C.M.J. Perceived relevance and information needs regarding food topics and preferred information sources among Dutch adults: Results of a quantitative consumer study. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 58 (2004) 1306-1313
101. van Kleef E., Frewer L.J., Chryssochoidis G.M., Houghton J.R., Korzen-Bohrd S., Krystallisb T., et al. Perceptions of food risk management among key stakeholders: Results from a cross-European study. Appetite 47 (2006) 46-63
102. van Trijp, J. C. M., & Ronteltap, A. (in press). A marketing and consumer behaviour perspective on personalised nutrition. In F. J. Kok, L. Bouwman, & F. Desiere (Eds.), Personalized nutrition: Principles and applications. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
103. Venkatesh V., Morris M.G., Davis G.B., and Davis F.D. User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly 27 3 (2003) 425-478
104. Verdurme A., and Viaene J. Consumer attitudes towards gm food: Literature review and recommendations for effective communication. Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing 13 2/3 (2001) 77-98
105. Wynne B. Knowledges in context. Science, Technology, & Human Values 16 1 (1991) 111-121
106. Ziamou P. Commercializing new technologies: Consumers' response to a new interface. The Journal of Product Innovation Management 19 (2002) 365-374
107. Ziamou P., and Ratneshwar S. Promoting consumer adoption of high-technology products: Is more information always better?. Journal of Consumer Psychology 12 4 (2002) 341-351