U.S. consumers attitudes toward farm animal cloning

Appetite

Volumn 57, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 483-492

  Brooks, Kathleen R ^a   Lusk, Jayson L ^b  

^a WEST TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Animal cloning; Ground beef; Milk; Paired comparison

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; AWARENESS; BREEDING; CATTLE; CLONING; CONSUMER ATTITUDE; FARM ANIMAL; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MALE; MEAT; MILK; UNITED STATES;

ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; ANIMALS; CATTLE; CLONING, ORGANISM; CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY; CONSUMER SATISFACTION; FEMALE; GOATS; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; INTERNET; MALE; MEAT; MIDDLE AGED; MILK; NUTRITION SURVEYS; QUESTIONNAIRES; SWINE; UNITED STATES; UNITED STATES FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION;

EID: 79960310725     PISSN: 01956663     EISSN: 10958304     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2011.06.014     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Bauer M.W. Arenas, platforms, and the biotechnology movement. Science Communication 2002, 24(2):144-161.
2. Bellows A.C., Alcaraz V., Hallman W.K. Gender and food, a study of attitudes in the USA towards organic, local, U.S. Grown, and GM-free foods. Appetite 2010, 55:540-550.
3. International Food Information Council Food biotechnology. A study of U.S. consumer trends, 2008 report 2008, Retrieved from http://www.foodinsight.org/Resources/Detail.aspx?topic=Food_Biotechnology_A_Study_of_U_S_Consumer_Attitudinal_Trends_2008_REPORT.
4. Izrael D., Hoaglin D.C., Battaglia M.P. A SAS macro for balancing a weighted sample. SAS conference proceedings. SAS users group international 25, Paper 258-25 2000.
5. Izrael D., Hoaglin D.C., Battaglia M.P. To rake or not to rake is not the question anymore with the enhanced raking macro. SAS conference proceedings. SAS users group international 29, Paper 207-29 2004.
6. Lee J.A., Soutar G.N., Louviere J. Measuring values using best-worst scaling. The LOV example. Psychology & Marketing 2007, 24(12):1043-1058.
7. Lewis I.M., French A.J., Tecirlioglu R.T., Vajta G., McClintock A.E., Nicholas K.R., et al. Commercial aspects of cloning and genetic modification in cattle. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 2004, 44:1105-1111.
8. Lusk J.L., Briggeman B.C. Food values. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 2009, 91:184-196.
9. Lusk J.L., Norwood F.B. An inferred valuation method. Land Economics 2009, 85:500-514.
10. Lusk J.L., Norwood F.B. Bridging the gap between laboratory experiments and naturally occurring markets. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 2009, 58:236-250.
11. Lusk J.L., Norwood F.B. Direct vs. indirect questioning. An application to the well-being of farm animals. Social Indicators Research 2010, 96:551-565.
12. Mapletoft R.J., Hasler J.F. Assisted reproductive technologies in cattle. A review. Revue scientifique et technique (International Office of Epizootics) 2005, 24(1):393-403.
13. Marley A.A.J., Louviere J.J. Some probabilistic models of best, worst, and best-worst choices. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 2005, 49:464-480.
14. Mellman Group Review of public opinion research. The Pew initiative on food and biotechnology 2006, Retrieved from http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Public_Opinion/Food_and_Biotechnology/2006summary.pdf.
15. Morrison D.G. Purchase intentions and purchase behavior. Journal of Marketing 1979, 43:65-74.
16. Morwitz V.G. Why consumers don't always accurately predict their own future behavior. Marketing Letters 1997, 8:57-70.
17. Paterson L., DeSousa P., Ritchie E., King T., Wilmut I. Application of reproductive biotechnology in animals. Implications and potentials. Applications of reproductive cloning. Animal Reproduction Science 2003, 79:137-143.
18. Sosin J., Richards M.D. What will consumers do? Understanding consumer response when meat and milk from cloned animals reach supermarkets. KRC Research 2005, Retrieved from www.clonesafety.org/documents/Analysis_of_Consumers_11_04_05.doc.
19. Storey, M.L. (2006). Consumers' knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and purchase intent regarding foods from the offspring of cloned animals. Final Topline Report. University of Maryland Center for Food, Nutrition, and Agriculture Policy.
20. Thurstone L.L. A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review 1927, 34:273-286.
21. Train K.E. Discrete choice methods with simulation 2003, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
22. U.S.Food and Drug Administration A primer on cloning and its use in livestock operations 2010, Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/SafetyHealth/AnimalCloning/ucm055513.htm.
23. United States Department of Agriculture USDA statement of FDA risk assessment on animal clones 2008, Retrieved from http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?contentid=2008/01/0012.xml&contentidonly=true.
24. Vajta G., Gjerris M. Science and technology of farm animal cloning. State of the art. Animal Reproduction Science 2006, 92:211-230.
25. Wall R.J, Powell A.M., Paape M.J., Kerr D.E., Banermann D.D., Pursel V.G., et al. Genetically enhanced cows resist intramammary Staphylococcus aureau infection. Nature Biotechnology 2005, 23:445-451.
26. Zhang J., Jargo J. Food companies pledge not to use clones. Wall Street Journal 2008, 4(September). Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122049659020697987.html.