USA: Center for Food Integrity, Gladstone, Missouri.
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 202 Document Number: D11946
Notes:
Online from CFI. 29 pages., The Center "examines the most important emerging trends in animal protein, the latest digital ethnography research on consumer mindset and traditional and social media chatter, and provide specific insight to guide strategy going forward."
20 pages., Via online from the University of Illinois website., Authors' review provided an overview of the data sources, computational methods, and applications of text data in the food industry. Applications of text data analysis were illustrated with respect to food safety and food fraud surveillance, dietary pattern characterization, consumer-opinion mining, new-product development, food knowledge discovery, food supply-chain management, and online food systems.
18 pages., via online journal., Genetically modified (GM) foods have attracted a great deal of controversy. While some consumers and organizations regard GM foods as safe, many other consumers and organizations remain concerned about their potential health risks. The results of three studies suggest that consumers respond differently to persuasive messages regarding GM foods on the basis of their preexisting attitudes. Weak anti-GM consumers tend to comply with a variety of pro-GM messages. In contrast, strong anti-GM consumers exhibit message-opposing behavior. Moreover, they respond just as negatively to a safety message (claiming that GM foods are safe) as to a risk message (claiming that GM foods are unsafe). The mechanism underlying these effects is consumers’ perceived health risk. A benefit message claiming that GM foods are beneficial (e.g., more nutritious than their conventional counterparts) is a better alternative for strong anti-GM consumers. Finally, the results suggest that persuasive messages do not significantly change pro-GM consumers’ evaluations of these foods.
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.
