United States: Texas Tech Univeristy, Lubbock, Texas
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 204 Document Number: D12460
Notes:
115 pages, Lab grown meat is a new technology being developed as a potential alternative protein source. Although some research has been done about public perception of lab grown meat, no studies to date have analyzed social media content regarding this topic. Still yet, no studies have observed the effects of message themes on public perception of lab grown meat. This two-part study first sought to analyze the Twitter messages discussing lab grown meat using Meltwater, a social media monitoring software. Secondly, the study sought to better understand measures of uncertainty and risk and benefit perceptions after viewing a themed blog post about lab grown meat. In part one, a relevant keyword search from August 28, 2018 to February 28, 2019 collected over 11,000 Twitter messages. Sentiment of messages was analyzed with 47% of messages being neutral. Meltwater identified trending themes that were all closely tied to lab grown meat, and top content posters with the most amount of potential reach were identified. All top posters were found to be news entities or organizations instead of personal Twitter accounts. In part two, participants were randomly assigned one of three themed blog posts against lab grown meat, neutral, or support lab grown meat. Perception questions were asked after viewing the blog post, and a total of 238 responses were collected. Results indicated message theme had a statistically significant effect on risk perception, benefit perception, and intention to share, but not on message evaluation or measures of uncertainty. Further discussion as well as suggestions for future research are included.
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.
10 pages, In vitro meat (IVM) grown from animal cells is approaching commercial viability. This technology could enable consumers to circumvent the ethical and environmental issues associated with meat-eating. However, consumer acceptance of IVM is uncertain, and is partly dependent on how the product is framed. This study investigated the effect of different names for IVM on measures of consumer acceptance. Participants (N = 185) were allocated to one of four conditions in an experimental design in which the product name was manipulated to be ‘clean meat’, ‘cultured meat’, ‘animal free meat’, or ‘lab grown meat’. Participants gave word associations and measures of their attitudes and behavioural intentions towards the product. The results indicated that those in the ‘clean meat’ and ‘animal free meat’ conditions had significantly more positive attitudes towards IVM than those in the ‘lab grown meat’ condition, and those in the ‘clean meat’ condition had significantly more positive behavioural intentions towards IVM compared to those in the ‘lab grown meat’ condition. Mediation analyses indicated that the valence of associations accounted for a significant amount of the observed differences, suggesting that anchoring can explain these differences. We discuss these results in the context of social representations theory and give recommendations for future research.
