1 - 3 of 3
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. Listen to science and studies, not false claims and rhetoric
- Collection:
- Agricultural Communications Documentation Center (ACDC)
- Contributers:
- Thorne, Teresa (author)
- Format:
- Commentary
- Publication Date:
- 2021-03
- Published:
- USA
- Location:
- Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 202 Document Number: D12136
- Journal Title:
- Packer
- Notes:
- Online from publisher. 3 pages., In this commentary, the Executive Director of the Alliance for Food and Farming argues that the "dirty dozen" list published annually by the Environmental Working Group is "scientifically unsupportable, negatively impacts consumers and it is insulting to farmers and farm workers working hard every day to provide produce to consumers." She says, "If we have learned anything from the pandemic, it is that science (not rhetoric or false claims) needs to guide our health and safety choices."
3. Relationship between cognitive and affective processes, and willingness to pay for pesticide-free and GMO-free labeling
- Collection:
- Agricultural Communications Documentation Center (ACDC)
- Contributers:
- Grebitus, Carola (author) and Van Loo, Ellen J. (author)
- Format:
- Journal article
- Publication Date:
- 2022-03-03
- Published:
- United States: Wiley Online
- Location:
- Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 204 Document Number: D12448
- Journal Title:
- Journal of Agricultural Economics
- Notes:
- 15pgs, Research has suggested to not solely include cognitive processes but also affective processes in economic choice modeling. Studying Medjool dates, we conducted a laboratory experiment combining choice experiments and eye-tracking to account for cognitive processes. In addition, participants indicated their level of worry related to production practices to account for affective processes. Our results show that consumers worry more about pesticide residues than genetic modification in foods. They also pay more attention to labels related to these production practices compared to other labels; and the production practice labels received the highest willingness to pay (WTP). Results from linear regressions show that both cognitive and affective processes are associated with WTP. Especially in the full model for WTP for pesticide-free labeling an increase of attention by 1 s increases WTP on average by $0.10 and an increase of the level of worry from one category to the next increases WTP on average by $0.17. Overall, results show that including both cognitive and affective processes as explanatory variables is important when determining factors associated with WTP.