Information processing of genetically modified food messages under different motives: An adaptation of the multiple-motive heuristic-systematic model

Risk Analysis

Volumn 29, Issue 12, 2009, Pages 1793-1806

  Kim, Jooyoung ^a   Paek, Hye Jin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Attitude change; Genetically modified organism; Heuristic systematic model; Information processing

Indexed keywords

ATTITUDE CHANGE; EMPIRICAL FINDINGS; GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD; GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS; INFORMATION PROCESSING; LAY PUBLIC; RISK MANAGEMENT AND COMMUNICATION; SYSTEMATIC MODELS; TREATMENT CONDITIONS;

DATA PROCESSING; FLUORINE CONTAINING POLYMERS; RISK ANALYSIS; RISK MANAGEMENT;

HEURISTIC METHODS;

ATTITUDINAL SURVEY; COMMUNICATION; GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISM; INFORMATION PROCESSING; PERCEPTION; PUBLIC ATTITUDE; RISK ASSESSMENT;

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; RISK MANAGEMENT;

ATTITUDE; FEMALE; FOOD, GENETICALLY MODIFIED; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MOTIVATION; PUBLIC OPINION; QUESTIONNAIRES; RISK MANAGEMENT; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 72249106378     PISSN: 02724332     EISSN: 15396924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2009.01324.x     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Poortinga W, Pidgeon NF. Exploring the structure of attitudes toward genetically modified food. Risk Analysis, 2006 26 (6 1707 1719.
2. Human Genome Project. Genetically modified foods and organisms. Available at : http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human-Genome/elsi/gmfood.shtml, Accessed on August 13, 2007.
3. Grove-White R, Macnaghten P, Mayer S, Wynne B. Uncertain World: Genetically Modified Organisms, Food and Public Opinion in Britain. Lancaster : University of Lancaster, 1997.
4. Marris C, Wynne B, Simmons P, Weldon S. Public Perceptions of Agricultural Biotechnologies in Europe: Final Report. Lancaster, UK : PABE.
5. Frewer LJ, Miles S, Marsh R. The media and genetically modified foods: Evidence in support of social amplification of risk. Risk Analysis, 2002 22 (4 701 711.
6. Eagly AH, Chaiken S. The Psychology of Attitudes. Fort Worth, TX : Harcourt College Publishers, 1993.
7. Kahlor L, Dunwoody S, Griffin RJ, Neuwirth K, Giese J. Studying heuristic-systematic processing of risk communication. Risk Analysis, 2003 23 (2 355 368.
8. Griffin RJ, Neuwirth K Giese J. Dunwoody S. Linking the heuristic-systematic model and depth of processing. Communication Research, 2002 29 (6 705 732.
9. Trumbo CW. Heuristic-systematic information processing and risk judgment. Risk Analysis, 1999 19 (3 391 400.
10. Trumbo CW. Information processing and risk perception: An adaptation of the heuristic-systematic model. Journal of Communication, 2002 52 (2 367 381.
11. Johnson BB. Testing and expanding a model of cognitive processing of risk information. Risk Analysis, 2005 25 (3 631 650.
12. Jonas E, Schulz-Hardt S, Frey D. Giving advice or making decisions in someone else's place: The influence of impression, defense, and accuracy motivation on the search for new information. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2005 31 (7 977 990.
13. Nienhuis AE, Manstead AS, Spears R. Multiple motives and persuasive communication: Creative elaboration as a result of impression motivation and accuracy motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2005 27 (1 118 132.
14. Chaiken S. Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1980 39 : 752 766.
15. Chaiken S. The heuristic model of persuasion. Chapter 1 in Zanna MP, Olson JM, Herman CP (eds). Social Influence: The Ontario Symposium. Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum, 1987.
16. Chang C. Country of origin as a heuristic cue: The effects of message ambiguity and product involvement. Media Psychology, 2004 6 : 169 192.
17. Maheswaran D, Mackie DM, Chaiken S. Brand name as a heuristic cue. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1992 1 (4 317 336.
18. Aaker J, Maheswaran D. The effects of cultural orientation on persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 1997 24 (3 315 328.
19. Chaken S, Liberman A, Eagly AH. Heuristic and systematic information processing within and beyond the persuasions context. Chapter 7 in Uleman JS, Bargh JA (eds). Unintended Thought. New York : Guilford Press, 1989.
20. Bohner G, Chaiken S, Hunyadi P. The role of mood and message ambiguity in the interplay of heuristic and systematic processing. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1994 24 (1 207 221.
21. Jain SP, Maheswaran D. Motivated reasoning: A depth-of-processing perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 2000 26 (4 358 371.
22. Griffin RJ, Dunwoody S, Neuwirth K. Proposed model of the relationship of risk information seeking and processing to the development of preventive behaviors. Environmental Research, 1999 80 (2 230 245.
23. Petty RE, Priester JR. Mass media attitude change: Implications of the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Chapter 7 in Bryant J, Zillmann D (eds). Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research. Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum, 1994.
24. Chaiken S, Maheswaran D. Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1994 66 (3 460 473.
25. Maheswaran D, Chaiken S. Promoting systematic processing in low motivation settings: Effect of incongruent information on processing and judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1991 61 (1 13 25.
26. Zuckerman A, Chaiken S. A heuristic-systematic processing analysis of the effectiveness of product warning labels. Psychology and Marketing, 1998 15 (7 621 642.
27. Chen S, Duckworth K, Chaiken S. Motivated heuristic and systematic processing. Psychological Inquiry, 1999 10 (1 44 49.
28. Giner-Sorolla R, Chaiken S. Selective use of heuristic and systematic processing under defense motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1997 32 (1 84 97.
29. Chen S, Schechter D, Chaiken S. Getting at the truth or getting along: Accuracy versus impression-motivated heuristic and systematic processing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1996 71 (2 262 275.
30. Katz D. The functional approach to the study of attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly, 1960 24 (2 163 204.
31. Liberman A, Chaiken S. Defensive processing of personally relevant health messages. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1992 18 (6 669 679.
32. Sherif M, Hovland CI. Social judgment: Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Communication and Attitude Change. New Haven, CT : Yale University Press, 1961.
33. Lord CG, Ross L, Lepper MR. Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories and subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1979 37 (11 2098 2109.
34. Poortinga W, Pidgeon NF. Trust, the asymmetry principle, and the role of prior beliefs. Risk Analysis, 2004 24 (6 1475 1486.
35. White MP, Pahl S, Buehner MJ, Haye A. Trust in risky messages: The role of prior beliefs. Risk Analysis, 2003 23 (4 717 726.
36. Kline RB. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York : Guilford Press, 2005.
37. Hu LT, Bentler P. Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 1995 3 (4 424 453.
38. Anderson JC, Gerbing DW. Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 1988 103 (3 441 423.
39. Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 1981 18 : 39 50.
40. Moscovici S. Social influence and conformity. Pp. 347 412 in Lindzey G, Aronson E (eds). Handbook of Social Psychology: Special Fields and Applications. New York : Random House, 1985.
41. Cialdini RB, Reno RR, Kallgren CA. A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1990 May 58 : 1015 1026.
42. Yanovitzky I, Rimal RN. Communication and normative influence: An introduction to the special issue. Communication Theory, 2006 16 (1 1 6.
43. Kahan DM, Braman D, Slovic P, Gastil J, Cohen G. Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. Nature Nanotechnology, 2009 4 (2 87 90.
44. Peters E, Slovic P. The role of affect and worldviews as orienting dispositions in the perception and acceptance of nuclear power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1996 26 (16 1427 1453.
45. O'Keefe DJ. The persuasive effects of messages sidedness variations: A cautionary note concerning Allen's (1991) meta-analysis. Western Journal of Communication, 1993 57 (1 87 97.
46. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum, 1988.