The impact of communicating conflicting risk and benefit messages: An experimental study on red meat information

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 38, Issue , 2014, Pages 107-114

  Regan, Áine ^a   McConnon, Áine ^a   Kuttschreuter, MargÔt ^b   Rutsaert, Pieter ^c,e   Shan, Liran ^a   Pieniak, Zuzanna ^c   Barnett, Julie ^d   Verbeke, Wim ^c   Wall, Patrick ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^c GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^d INTERNATIONAL RICE RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Philippines)

^e BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Benefits; Communication; Conflicting information; Red meat; Risks

Indexed keywords

EID: 84903463357     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.05.019     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Breakwell G.M., Barnett J. The significance of uncertainty and conflict: Developing a social psychological theory of risk communications. New Review of Social Psychology 2003, 2(1):107-114.
2. Brislin R. Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 1970, 1(3):185-216.
3. Dean M., Shepherd R. Effects of information from sources in conflict and in consensus on perceptions of genetically modified food. Food Quality and Preference 2007, 18:460-469.
4. European Commission Special Eurobarometer 354: Food-related risks 2010, European Commission, Brussels, Belgium.
5. Fischer A.R.H., Frewer L.J. Consumer familiarity with foods and the perception of risks and benefits. Food Quality and Preference 2009, 20:576-585.
6. Goldberg J.P., Sliwa S.A. Getting balanced nutrition messages across. Communicating actionable nutrition messages: Challenges and opportunities. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 2011, 70:26-37.
7. Hofstede G.H. Culture's consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviours, Institutions, and Organisations Across Nations 2001, Sage Publications, CA.
8. Hofstede, G. H., 2014. Cultural tools country comparison. Retrieved 20.03.14. http://geert-hofstede.com/countries.html.
9. Houghton J., Van Kleef E., Rowe G., Frewer L.J. Consumer perceptions of the effectiveness of food risk management practices: A cross-cultural study. Health, Risk, & Society 2006, 8(2):165-183.
10. Hu Y., Sundar S.S. Effects of online health sources on credibility and behavioural intentions. Communication Research 2010, 37(1):105-132.
11. Lupton D., Chapman S. 'A healthy lifestyle might be the death of you': Discourses on diet, cholesterol control and heart disease in the press and among the lay public. Sociology of Health & Illness 1995, 17(4):477-494.
12. Miles S., Frewer L.J. Public perception of scientific uncertainty in relation to food hazards. Journal of Risk Research 2003, 6(3):267-283.
13. Nagler R.H. Adverse outcomes associated with media exposure to contradictory nutrition messages. Journal of Health Communication 2014, 19(1):24-40.
14. Nagler R.H., Hornik R.C. Measuring media exposure to contradictory health information: A comparative analysis of four potential measures. Communication Methods and Measures 2012, 6(1):56-75.
15. O'Key V., Hugh-Jones S. 'I don't need anybody to tell me what I should be doing'. A discursive analysis of maternal accounts of (mis)trust of healthy eating information. Appetite 2010, 54:524-532.
16. Payne J.W. Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: An information search and protocol analysis. Organisational Behaviour and Human Performance 1976, 167:366-387.
17. Perez-Cueto F.J.A., Verbeke W. Consumer implications of the WCRF's permanent update on colorectal cancer. Meat Science 2012, 90:977-978.
18. Peters R.G., Covello V.T., McCallum D.B. The determinants of trust and credibility in environmental risk communication: An empirical study. Risk Analysis 1997, 17(1):43-54.
19. Peterson R.A., Albaum G., Beltramini R.F. A meta-analysis of effect sizes in consumer behaviour experiments. Journal of Consumer Research 1985, 12:97-103.
20. Rutsaert P., Pieniak Z., Regan Á., McConnon Á., Verbeke W. Consumer interest in receiving information through social media about the risks of pesticide residues. Food Control 2013, 34(2):386-392.
21. Schneider J. Making space for the "nuances of truth": Communication and uncertainty at an environmental journalists' workshop. Science Communication 2010, 32:171-201.
22. Smillie L., Blissett A. A model for developing risk communication strategy. Journal of Risk Research 2010, 13(1):115-134.
23. Smithson M. Conflict aversion: Preference for ambiguity vs conflict in sources and evidence. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes 1999, 79(3):179-198.
24. Spiegelhalter, D. (2012). What does a 13% increased risk of death mean? Retrieved 06.09.12. http://understandinguncertainty.org/comment/1430#comment-1430.
25. Van Dijk H., Fischer A.R.H., Frewer L.J. Consumer responses to integrated risk-benefit information associated with the consumption of food. Risk Analysis 2011, 31(3):429-439.
26. Van Dijk H., Houghton J., Van Kleef E., van der Lans I., Rowe G., Frewer L.J. Consumer responses to communication about food risk management. Appetite 2008, 50:340-352.
27. Van Dijk H., Van Kleef E., Owen H., Frewer L.J. Consumer preferences regarding food-related risk-benefit messages. British Food Journal 2012, 114(3):387-399.
28. Van Kleef E., Houghton J., Krystallis A., Pfenning U., Rowe G., Van Dijk H., Frewer L.J. Consumer evaluations of food risk management quality in Europe. Risk Analysis 2007, 27:1565-1579.
29. Vardeman J.E., Aldoory L. A qualitative study of how women make meaning of contradictory media messages about the risks of eating fish. Health Communication 2008, 23:282-291.
30. Verbeke W. Agriculture and the food industry in the information age. European Review of Agricultural Economics 2005, 32(3):347-368.
31. Verbeke W., Vanhonacker F., Frewer L.J., Sioen I., De Henauw S., Van Camp J. Communicating risks and benefits from fish consumption: Impact on Belgian consumers' perception and intention to eat fish. Risk Analysis 2008, 28(4):951-967.
32. Viscussi W.K., Magat W.A., Huber J. Communication of ambiguous risk information. Theory and Decision 1991, 31:159-173.
33. Wardekker J.A., van der Sluijs J.P., Janssen P.H.M., Kloprogge P., Petersen A.C. Uncertainty communication in environmental assessments: Views from the Dutch science-policy interface. Environmental Science & Policy 2008, 11:627-641.
34. Yaniv I., Milyavsky M. Using advice from multiple sources to revise and improve judgements. Organisational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes 2007, 103:104-120.