Consumer fears and familiarity of processed food. The value of information provided by the FTNS

Appetite

Volumn 73, Issue , 2014, Pages 140-146

  Verneau, Fabio ^a   Caracciolo, Francesco ^a   Coppola, Adele ^a   Lombardi, Pasquale ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES FEDERICO II   (Italy)

Author keywords

Familiarity scale; Food neophobia scale; Italian consumers

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONSUMER; CONSUMER ATTITUDE; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; FEAR; FEMALE; FOOD FREEZING; FOOD HANDLING; FOOD INTAKE; FOOD PREFERENCE; FOOD PROCESSING; HUMAN; MALE; NEOPHOBIA;

FAMILIARITY SCALE; FOOD NEOPHOBIA SCALE; ITALIAN CONSUMERS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ATTITUDE; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; CONSUMER SATISFACTION; DIET; FAST FOODS; FEAR; FEMALE; FOOD HABITS; FOOD HANDLING; FOOD PREFERENCES; FOOD TECHNOLOGY; FUNCTIONAL FOOD; HUMANS; ITALY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERSONALITY; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); TASTE; YOGURT; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84888788661     PISSN: 01956663     EISSN: 10958304     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2013.11.004     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Process 1991, 50:179-211.
2. Ares G., Gámbaro A. Influence of gender, age and motives underlying food choice on perceived healthiness and willingness to try functional foods. Appetite 2007, 49:148-158.
3. Bäckström A., Pirttilä-Backman A.M., Tuorila H. Willingness to try new foods as predicted by social representations and attitude and trait scales. Appetite 2004, 43:75-83.
4. Bech-Larsen T., Grunert K.G. The perceived healthiness of functional foods. A conjoint study of Danish, Finnish and American consumers' perception of functional foods. Appetite 2003, 40:9-14.
5. Biltekoff C. Consumer response. The paradoxes of food and health. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 2010, 1190:174-178.
6. Cardello A.V. Consumer concerns and expectations about novel food processing technologies. Effects on product liking. Appetite 2003, 40:217-233.
7. Cembalo L., Migliore G., Schifani G. Consumers in postmodern society and alternative food networks. The organic food fairs case in Sicily. New Medit 2012, 11(3):41-49.
8. Chen Q., Anders S., An H. Measuring consumer resistance to a new food technology. A choice experiment in meat packaging. Food Quality and Preference 2013, 28(2):419-428.
9. Cox D.N., Evans G. Construction and validation of a psychometric scale to measure consumer's fears of novel food technologies. The food technology neophobia scale. Food Quality and Preference 2008, 19:704-710.
10. Cox D.N., Evans G., Lease H.J. The influence of information and beliefs about technology on the acceptance of novel food technologies. A conjoint study of farmed prawn concepts. Food Quality and Preference 2007, 18(5):813-823.
11. de Jonge J., van Trijp J.C.M., van der Lans I.A., Renes R.J., Frewer L.J. How trust in institutions and organizations builds general consumer confidence in the safety of food. A decomposition of effects. Appetite 2008, 51(2):311-317.
12. Diamantopoulos A., Schlegelmilch B.B., Sinkovics R.R., Bohlen G.M. Can socio-demographics still play a role in profiling green consumers? A review of the evidence and an empirical investigation. Journal of Business Research 2003, 56:465-480.
13. Eiser R.J., Miles S., Frewer L.J. Trust, perceived risk, and attitudes toward food technologies. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 2002, 32(11):2423-2433.
14. Evans G., Kermarrec C., Sable T., Cox D.N. Reliability and predictive validity of the Food Technology Neophobia Scale. Appetite 2010, 54:390-393.
15. Faul F., Erdfelder E., Buchner A., Lang A.G. Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1. Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods 2009, 41:1149-1160.
16. Fernández-Ruiz V., Claret A., Chaya C. Testing a Spanish-version of the food neophobia scale. Food Quality and Preference 2013, 28:222-225.
17. Fife-Schawl C., Rowe J. Public perceptions of everyday food hazards. A psychometric study. Risk Analysis 1996, 16(4):487-500.
18. Fischler C. L'Homnivore. le goÛt, la cuisine et le corps 1990, Odile Jacob, Paris.
19. Gaviria P.R., Bluemelhuber C. Consumers' transformations in a liquid society. introducing the concepts of autobiographical-concern and desire-assemblage. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 2010, 9:126-138.
20. Goldsmith R.E., Hofacker C.F. Measuring consumer innovativeness. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 1991, 19:209-221.
21. Gracia A., de Magistris T. The demand for organic foods in the South of Italy. A discrete choice model. Food Policy 2008, 33:386-396.
22. Grunert K.G. Food quality and safety. Consumer perception and demand. European Review of Agricultural Economics 2005, 32(3):369-391.
23. Hinote B.P., Cockerham W.C., Abbott P. Psychological distress and dietary patterns in eight post-Soviet republics. Appetite 2009, 53:24-33.
24. Italian National Institute of Statistics (2011). .
25. Kirk S.F., Greenwood D., Cade J.E., Pearman A.D. Public perception of a range of potential food risks in the United Kingdom. Appetite 2002, 38:189-197.
26. Koster E.P. Diversity in the determinants of food choice. A psychological perspective. Food Quality and Preference 2009, 20:70-82.
27. Lang J.T., Hallman W.K. Who does the public trust? The case of genetically modified food in the United States. Risk Analysis 2005, 25(5):1241-1252.
28. Lobb A.E., Mazzocchi M., Traill W.B. Modelling risk perception and trust in food safety information within the theory of planned behaviour. Food Quality and Preference 2007, 18(2):384-395.
29. Food choice acceptance and consumption 1996, Blackie Academic and Professional, London. H.J.H. MacFie, H.L. Meiselman (Eds.).
30. Matin A.A.H., Goddard E., Vandermoere F., Blanchemanche S., Bieberstein A., Marette S., Roosen J. Do environmental attitudes and food technology neophobia affect perceptions of the benefits of nanotechnology?. International Journal of Consumer Studies 2012, 36(2):149-157.
31. McFadden D. Economic choices. American Economic Review 2001, 91:351-378.
32. Nederhof A.J. Methods of coping with social desirability bias. A review. European Journal of Social Psychology 1985, 15(3):263-280.
33. Panico T., Del Giudice T., Cicia G., Cembalo L. Consumption of organic strawberries in Italy. Demand analysis. New Medit 2011, 10:11-16.
34. Pliner P. Development of measures of food neophobia in children. Appetite 1994, 23:147-163.
35. Pliner P., Hobden K. Development of a scale to measure the trait of food neophobia in humans. Appetite 1992, 19:105-120.
36. Rozin P. The meaning of "natural". Process more important than content. Psychological Science 2005, 16:652-658.
37. Siegrist M. Factors influencing public acceptance of innovative food technologies and products. Food Innovation Management 2008, 19(11):603-608.
38. Siegrist M., Stampfli N., Kastenholz H., Keller C. Perceived risks and perceived benefits of different nanotechnology foods and nanotechnology food packaging. Appetite 2008, 51:283-290.
39. Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science 1987, 236:280-285.
40. Song H., Schwarz N. It's difficult to pronounce, it must be risky fluency, familiarity, and risk perception. Psychological Science 2009, 20(2):135-138.
41. Weber E.U., Blais A., Betz N.E. A domain-specific risk-attitude scale. Measuring risk perceptions and risk benefit. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 2002, 15(4):263-290.
42. Westerman J.W., Beekun R.I., Stedham Y., Yamamura J. Peers versus national culture. An analysis of antecedents to ethical decision-making. Journal of Business Ethics 2007, 75:239-252.
43. World Health Organization (2005). .
44. Winkelmann R., Boes S. Analysis of microdata 2009, Springer, Berlin. 2nd ed.