Beyond information seeking: Consumers' online deliberation about the risks and benefits of red meat

Food Quality and Preference

Volumn 39, Issue , 2015, Pages 191-201

  Rutsaert, Pieter ^a,b   Barnett, Julie ^c   Gaspar, Rui ^d,e   Marcu, Afrodita ^f   Pieniak, Zuzanna ^a   Seibt, Beate ^g   Lima, Maria Luisa ^d   Fletcher, Dave ^h   Verbeke, Wim ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^b INTERNATIONAL RICE RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Philippines)

^c University of Bath   (United Kingdom)

^d INSTITUTO UNIVERSITÁRIO DE LISBOA ISCTE IUL   (Portugal)

^e UNIVERSITY OF ÉVORA   (Portugal)

^f UNIVERSITY OF SURREY   (United Kingdom)

^g UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^h White October   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Consumer; Information seeking; Online deliberation; Red meat; Risk benefit communication

Indexed keywords

EID: 84907303569     PISSN: 09503293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.07.011     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Agostino D. Using social media to engage citizens: A study of Italian municipalities. Public Relations Review 2013, 39(3):232-234.
2. Anderson A.A., Delborne J., Kleinman D.L. Information beyond the forum: Motivations, strategies, and impacts of citizen participants seeking information during a consensus conference. Public Understanding of Science 2012, 22:955-970.
3. Aston L.M., Smith J.N., Powles J.W. Impact of a reduced red and processed meat dietary pattern on disease risks and greenhouse gas emissions in the UK: A modelling study. BMJ Open 2012, 2(5):e001072.
4. Banovic M., Grunert K.G., Barreira M.M., Fontes M.A. Beef quality perception at the point of purchase: A study from Portugal. Food Quality and Preference 2009, 20:335-342.
5. Barnett J., Fife-Schaw C., Shepherd R., Timotijevic L., Fletcher J., Fletcher D. Online deliberative engagement: A pilot study. A report for the Wellcome Trust 2008, University of Surrey/Brook Lyndhurst/White October, Surrey, U.K.
6. Barnett J., McConnon A., Kennedy J., Raats M., Shepherd R., Verbeke W., et al. Development of strategies for effective communication of food risks and benefits across Europe: Design and conceptual framework of the FoodRisC project. BMC Public Health 2011, 11:9.
7. BBC. (2012). Red meat increases death, cancer and heart risk, says study. Accessed 17/03/12. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-17345967.
8. Bearth A., Cousin M.-E., Siegrist M. The consumer's perception of artificial food additives: Influences on acceptance, risk and benefit perceptions. Food Quality and Preference 2014, 38:14-23.
9. Bjoernes C.D., Laursen B.S., Delmar C., Cummings E., Nøhr C. A dialogue-based web application enhances personalized access to healthcare professionals - An intervention study. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2012, 12(1):96.
10. Boczkowski P.J., Mitchelstein E. How users take advantage of different forms of interactivity on online news sites: Clicking, e-mailing, and commenting. Human Communication Research 2012, 38(1):1-29.
11. Brossard D., Scheufele D.A. Science, new media, and the public. Science 2013, 339(6115):40-41.
12. Browne M., Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Testing structural equation models 1993, 136-165. Sage, Newbury Park, CA. K.A. Bollen, J. Long (Eds.).
13. Burkhalter S., Gastil J., Kelshaw T. A conceptual definition and theoretical model of public deliberation in small face-to-face groups. Communications Theory 2002, 12(4):398-422.
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(5):752-766.
15. Cope S., Frewer L.J., Houghton J., Rowe G., Fischer A.R.H., de Jonge J. Consumer perceptions of best practice in food risk communication and management: Implications for risk analysis policy. Food Policy 2010, 35(4):349-357.
16. Davies T. Introduction: The blossoming field of online deliberation. Online deliberation: Design, research, and practice 2009, 1-19. CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA. T. Davies, S.P. Gangadharan (Eds.).
17. de Boer J., Schösler H., Boersema J.J. Climate change and meat eating: An inconvenient couple?. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2013, 33:1-8.
18. De Vocht M., Cauberghe V., Sas B., Uyttendaele M. Analyzing consumers' reactions to news coverage of the 2011 Escherichia coli O104:H4 outbreak, using the extended parallel processing model. Journal of Food Protection 2013, 76:473-481.
19. Demont M., Rutsaert P., Ndour M., Verbeke W., Seck P.A., Tollens E. Experimental auctions, collective induction and choice shift: Willingness-to-pay for rice quality in Senegal. European Review of Agricultural Economics 2013, 40(2):261-286.
20. Dijkstra A.M., Gutteling J.M. Communicative aspects of the public-science relationship explored: Results of focus group discussions about biotechnology and genomics. Science Communication 2012, 34(3):363-391.
21. Dillon J.T. The effect of questions in education and other enterprises. Journal of Curriculum Studies 1982, 14(2):127-152.
22. Eagly A.H., Chaiken S. The elaboration likelihood and heuristic-systematic models. The psychology of attitudes 1993, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, Fort Worth, TX. A.H. Eagly, S. Chaiken (Eds.).
23. EFSA. (2012). When food is cooking up a storm: Proven recipes for risk communications. Parma, Italy: EFSA (European Food Safety Authority). Accessed 24.07.12. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/corporate/doc/riskcommguidelines.pdf.
24. Eibach R.P., Mock S.E. The vigilant parent: Parental role salience affects parents' risks perceptions, risk aversion, and trust in strangers. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 2011, 47:694-697.
25. Fischer A.R.H., Frewer L.J. Consumer familiarity with foods and the perception of risks and benefits. Food Quality and Preference 2009, 20(8):576-585.
26. Foran J.A., Good D.H., Carpenter D.O., Hamilton M.C., Knuth B.A., Schwager S.J. Quantitative analysis of the benefits and risks of consuming farmed and wild salmon. Journal of Nutrition 2005, 135(11):2639-2643.
27. Gaskell G., Allum N., Wagner W., Kronberger N., Torgersen H., Hampel J., et al. GM foods and the misperception of risk perception. Risk Analysis 2004, 24(1):185-194.
28. Gaspar R., Gorjão S., Seibt B., Lima M.L., Barnett J., Moss A., et al. Tweeting during food crises: A psychosocial analysis of EHEC threat coping expressions on social media. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 2014, 72(2):239-254.
29. Griffin R.J., 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.
30. Hair J., Black W., Babin B., Anderson R., Tatham R. Multivariate data analysis 2006, Pearson Education Inc., New Jersey.
31. Hansen T., Boye H., Thomsen T.U. Involvement, competencies, gender and food health information seeking. British Food Journal 2010, 112:387-402.
32. Hansen J., Holm L., Frewer L., Robinson P., Sandoe P. Beyond the knowledge deficit: Recent research into lay and expert attitudes to food risks. Appetite 2003, 41(2):111-121.
33. Hocquette J.-F., Mainsant P., Daudin J.-D., Cassar-Malek I., Rémond D., Doreau M., et al. La viande du future sera-t-elle produite in vitro? [Will meat be produced in vitro in the future?]. INRA Productions Animales 2013, 26:363-374.
34. Hoffman D.L., Novak T.P. Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated environments: Conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing 1996, 60(3):50-68.
35. Hu L.T., Bentler P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 1999, 6(1):1-55.
36. Jiang Z., Chan J., Tan B.C.Y., Chua W.S. Effects of interactivity on website involvement and purchase intention. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 2010, 11(1):34-59.
37. Kahneman D., Tversky A. Prospect theory: Analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 1979, 47(2):263-291.
38. Kuttschreuter M., Rutsaert P., Hilvarda F., Regan A., Barnett J., Verbeke W. Seeking information about food-related risks: The contribution of social media. Food Quality and Preference 2014, 37:10-18.
39. Levenson C.W., Axelrad D.M. Too much of a good thing? Update on fish consumption and mercury exposure. Nutrition Reviews 2006, 64(3):139-145.
40. Macnaghten P., Kearnes M.B., Wynne B. Nanotechnology, governance, and public deliberation: What role for the social sciences?. Science Communication 2005, 27(2):268-291.
41. Marcu A., Gaspar R., Rutsaert P., Seibt B., Fletcher D., Verbeke W., et al. Analogies, metaphors, and wondering about the future: Lay sense-making around synthetic meat. Public Understanding of Science 2014, 10.1177/0963662514521106.
42. Matthews D. Politics for the people: Finding a responsive public voice 1994, University of Illinois Press, Chicago, IL.
43. McAfee A.J., McSorley E.M., Cuskelly G.J., Moss B.W., Wallace J.M.W., Bonham M.P., et al. Red meat consumption: An overview of the risks and benefits. Meat Science 2010, 84(1):1-13.
44. McGloin A., Delaney L., Hudson E., Wall P. Nutrition communication: The challenge of effective food risk communication. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 2009, 68(2):135-141.
45. Min S.J. Online vs. face-to-face deliberation: Effects on civic engagement. Journal of Computer-Mediated, Communication 2007, 12(4):11.
46. Pan A., Sun Q., Bernstein A.M., Schulze M.B., Manson J.E., Stampfer M.J., et al. Red meat consumption and mortality results from 2 prospective cohort studies. Archives of Internal Medicine 2012, 172(7):555-563.
47. Panagiotopoulos, P., Barnett, J., & Brooks L. (2013). Social Media and Government Responsiveness: The Case of the UK Food Standards Agency. Proceedings from IFIP 8.5 12th International Government on Electronic Government (Springer LNCS), Koblenz, Germany, September 2013.
48. Parry J. Oryx and crake and the new nostalgia for meat. Society and Animals 2009, 17:241-256.
49. Pieniak Z., Verbeke W., Scholderer J., Brunso K., Olsen S.O. Impact of consumers' health beliefs, health involvement and risk perception on fish consumption: A study in five European countries. British Food Journal 2008, 110(8-9):898-915.
50. Powell M., Delborne J., Colin M. Beyond engagement exercises: Exploring the U.S. national citizens' technology forum from the bottom-up. Journal of Public Deliberation 2011, 7(1). (Article 4).
51. Qin W., Brown J.L. Consumer opinions about genetically engineered salmon and information effect on opinions: A qualitative approach. Science Communication 2006, 28(2):243-272.
52. Ramsey K.S., Wilson M.W. Rethinking the 'informed' participant: Precautions and recommendations for the design of online deliberation. Online deliberation: Design, research, and practice 2009, 309-316. CSLI Publications, Stanford, California. T.C. Davis, S.P. Gangadharan (Eds.).
53. Regan A., McConnon A., Kuttschreuter M., Rutsaert P., Shan L., Pieniak Z., et al. The impact of communicating conflicting risk and benefit messages: An experimental study on red meat information. Food Quality and Preference 2014, 38:107-114.
54. Ripberger J.T. Capturing curiosity: Using Internet search trends to measure public attentiveness. Policy Studies Journal 2011, 39(2):239-259.
55. Roosen J., Marette S., Blanchemanche S., Verger P. Does health information matter for modifying consumption? A field experiment measuring the impact of risk information on fish consumption. Review of Agricultural Economics 2009, 31(1):2-20.
56. Rutsaert P., Pieniak Z., Regan Á., McConnon Á., Kuttschreuter M., Lores M., et al. Social media as a useful tool in food risk and benefit communication? A strategic orientation approach. Food Policy 2014, 46:84-93.
57. Rutsaert P., Regan Á., Pieniak Z., McConnon Á., Moss A., Wall P., et al. The use of social media in food risk and benefit communication. Trends in Food Science & Technology 2013, 30(1):84-91.
58. Scholderer J., Kügler J.O., Veflen Olsen N., Verbeke W. Meal mapping. Food Quality and Preference 2013, 30:47-55.
59. Schösler H., de Boer J., Boersema J.J. Can we cut meat out of the dish? Constructing consumer-oriented pathways to meat substitution. Appetite 2012, 58:39-47.
60. Shepherd S., Kay A.C. On the perpetuation of ignorance: System dependence, system justification, and the motivated avoidance of sociopolitical information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2012, 102(2):264-280.
61. Smolinska K., Paluszkiewicz P. Risk of colorectal cancer in relation to frequency and total amount of red meat consumption. Systematic review and meta-analysis. Archives of Medical Science 2010, 6(4):605-610.
62. Song J.H., Zinkhan G.M. Determinants of perceived Web site interactivity. Journal of Marketing 2008, 72(2):99-113.
63. Sun Y., Fang Y., Lim K.H. Understanding sustained participation in transactional virtual communities. Decision Support Systems 2012, 53(1):12-22.
64. Sundar S., Kalyanaraman S., Brown J. Explicating Web site interactivity - Impression formation effects in political campaign sites. Communication Research 2003, 30(1):30-59.
65. Tabachnick B., Fidell L.S. Using multivariate statistics 2007, Allyn and Bacon, New York.
66. Thackeray R., Neiger B., Smith A., Van Wagenen S. Adoption and use of social media among public health departments. BMC Public Health 2012, 12(1):242.
67. van Dijk H., van Kleef E., Owen H., Frewer L.J. Consumer preferences regarding food-related risk-benefit messages. British Food Journal 2012, 114(2-3):387-399.
68. Van Wezemael L., Caputo V., Nayga R.M., Chryssochoidis G., Verbeke W. European consumer preferences for beef with nutrition and health claims: A multi-country investigation using discrete choice experiments. Food Policy 2014, 44:167-176.
69. Van Wezemael L., Verbeke W., Kügler J.O., de Barcellos M.D., Grunert K.G. European consumer and beef safety: Perceptions, expectations and uncertainty reduction strategies. Food Control 2010, 21:835-844.
70. Verbeke W. Consumer acceptance of functional foods: socio-demographic, cognitive and attitudinal determinants. Food Quality and Preference 2005, 16:45-57.
71. Verbeke, W., Sans, P., & Van Loo, E. J. (2014). Challenges and prospects for consumer acceptance of cultured meat. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, in press.
72. Verbeke W., Perez-Cueto F.J.A., de Barcellos M.D., Krystallis A., Grunert K.G. European citizen and consumer attitudes and preferences regarding beef and pork. Meat Science 2010, 84(2):284-292.
73. Verbeke W., Sioen I., Pieniak Z., Van Camp J., De Henauw S. Consumer perception versus scientific evidence about health benefits and safety risks from fish consumption. Public Health Nutrition 2005, 8(4):422-429.
74. Verbeke W., Vackier I. Profile and effects of consumer involvement in fresh meat. Meat Science 2004, 67:159-168.
75. 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.
76. Verbeke W., Ward R.W. Consumer interest in information cues denoting quality, traceability and origin: An application of ordered probit models to beef labels. Food Quality and Preference 2006, 17:453-467.
77. Wyness L., Weichselbaum E., O'Connor A., Williams E.B., Benelam B., Riley H., et al. Red meat in the diet: An update. Nutrition Bulletin 2011, 36(1):34-77.
78. Xenos M. New mediated deliberation: Blog and press coverage of the Alito nomination. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 2008, 13(2):485-503.
79. YouTube. (2011). Would you eat synthetic meat? Accessed 05/03/2012. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iO9q_paCcWA.