Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 83 Document Number: D10838
Notes:
Online from the Center for Food Integrity, Gladstone, Missouri. 2 pages., "New research shows a significant and growing group of health-conscious consumers is confused by the mixed messages they're receiving about the 'real deal' and the substitutes entering the market."
23 pages., via online journal, Cultured meat has yet to reach store shelves but is nonetheless a growing issue for consumers, producers, and government regulators, many of whom have taken to social media to discuss it. Using a conceptual framework of social cognitive theory and issues management, this qualitative content analysis investigated social-media discourse surrounding the topic of cultured meat in the United States by describing the content of the discussion in late 2018 and identifying individual influencers and communities of influencers engaged in the discussion. Data were collected from Twitter using listening platform Sysomos MAP. The thematic analysis revealed eight themes: legality and marketing, sustainability, acceptance, business, animal concerns, science and technology, health concerns, and timeline, and indicated that conflicting views and questions about cultured meat exist among conversation participants. Top influencers included philanthropists, government officials, journalists and writers, and animal-welfare advocates. These influencers were grouped into four distinct communities based on interactions with each other and other users. The topics identified in the analysis provide insight into ways in which communicators can enter these conversations, and influencer communities represent groups of users whose broad reach could more easily transmit pro-agriculture messages.
Via online. 5 pages., "Industry in a frenzy, trying to decode the sludge of public opinion while still getting used to the idea this is something to take seriously."
Van Loo, Ellen J. (author / Wageningen University), Caputo, Vincenzina (author / Michigan State University), and Lusk, Jayson L. (author / Purdue University)
Format:
Research report
Publication Date:
2019
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 85 Document Number: D10851
Via live link within an online article, "Consumers prefer real beef over other alternatives" by Greg Henderson. 37 pages., Results of a nationwide survey of more than 1,800 consumers who completed a choice experiment in which they selected among conventional beef and three alternative meat products at different prices. "Overall, this study shows most consumers strongly prefer conventional beef to the alternatives."
690 German survey recipients were given one of four different fictitious "newspaper articles" describing negative effects of meat consumption - either in terms of adverse effects on human health, on climate change, on animal welfare or on personal image. Findings showed that animal welfare and health arguments had the strongest effects at reducing meat consumption in both men and women.
14 pages., Online via UI electronic subscription., Examines the impact of gain and loss message framing and issue involvement elicitation on consumer willingness to pay for two food safety enhancing technologies: cattle vaccines against E. coli and direct-fed microbials. Results showed strong consumer preference and willingness to pay for the technologies and consumer welfare gains from their introduction.
20 pages., Via online journal., Consumers are concerned about the risks related to genetically modified (GM) food, and there is a need for agricultural communicators and educators to address those concerns. The purpose of this study was to explore Florida residents’ latitudes of acceptance, rejection, and noncommitment toward GM food messages. The findings from this study can be used to guide communication and education campaigns for GM food. An online survey was distributed to a non-probability sample of 500 Florida residents to fulfill the purpose of the study. The messages that most aligned with the respondents’ views toward GM food discussed how potential risks related to human health had not been adequately investigated and that GM food may be riskier to consume compared to traditional food. The messages that most opposed the respondents’ views were that GM food was safe for consumption and that it caused cancer in humans. People whose views most aligned with the message that GM food caused cancer in humans had the largest latitude of rejection, likely due to their extreme attitude, confirmation bias, and ego-involvement. The largest percentage of respondents accepted messages that aligned with their position but expressed noncommitment to messages that opposed their views. This lack of rejection and indication of alignment with messages related to potential risk and uncertainty indicated Florida consumers were unsure about the effects of GM food. Communicators and educators should acknowledge these concerns when delivering information about GM food to enhance the effectiveness of communication with consumers.
