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.
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.
18 pages., via online journal, As the public has expressed increasing concerns regarding the humane raising and handling of farm animals, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and industry organizations have developed a series of standards enforcing animal welfare in the poultry industry. Labels and value-added claims were created and defined to differentiate products and to inform consumers’ purchasing decisions. This study identified five labels related to animal welfare that are frequently found on food packages in the U.S. grocery stores, including both the mandatory labels and third-party, voluntary labels. Using a controlled online experiment (N=249), we examined the labels’ effects on consumers’ perception of humane treatment and purchasing tendencies toward egg products. Results showed that while most consumers lack knowledge regarding the labels’ meaning and certification standards, they rely on the labels with simplistic terms (e.g., "certified humane," "cage free") as heuristic cues to judge the ethical treatment of hens on the farm. However, the selected labels did not lead consumers to pay a higher premium for the labeled products. We discussed the implications for regulators, food marketers, and agricultural communicators.
Online via https://newprairiepress.org/jac, Authors identified five labels related to animal welfare that are frequently found on food packages in USA grocery stores Results of a controlled online experiment among consumers showed that while most consumers lacked knowledge regarding meaning of the labels and certification standards, they relied on the labels with simplistic terms as heuristic cues to judge the ethical treatment of hens on the farm. The selected labels did not lead consumers to pay a higher premium for the labeled products.
20 pages., This study was conducted to examine Florida consumers’ stance on legalizing the growing and processing of hemp, recently redefined as an agricultural commodity. Factors were explored that may explain their stance to provide insight into the communication needs in the early stages of the U.S. hemp industry revival. Results indicated that respondents who had more favorable attitudes toward legalizing hemp were also more likely to fall within the category of being overall “for legalizing hemp” when offered a binary choice. Further, attitude toward legalizing hemp was predicted by respondents’ objective knowledge of hemp topics, attitude toward legalizing marijuana, and perceived personal relevance of legalized hemp cultivation and production. A strong association between hemp and marijuana was also observed in both the quantitative and qualitative findings, and respondents indicated some confusion regarding the mind-altering properties of marijuana compared to hemp. As such, a key recommendation is that early communication messages and strategies be tailored toward educating the public on differences in the uses and psychoactive properties of hemp and marijuana. Future research is needed to identify other key messages needed to enhance public understanding of hemp, as well as the best methods of delivering such. Future research should be conducted with other hemp stakeholders, including policymakers, hemp license-holders, and other farmers and industry members to reconcile potential differences in key stakeholder perceptions and enhance the future viability of the industrial hemp market.
18 pages., via online journal, As food products marketed as “gluten-free” become increasingly popular, many consumers start to exclude sources of gluten (e.g., wheat, barley, and rye) from their diets for both medical and non-medical purposes. The grain industry is facing a growing challenge to (re)boost consumers’ confidence in the healthiness and safety of its commodities. Using 561 participants recruited from the Amazon Mechanical Turk workers’ panel, this study implemented a 2 (pretzels vs. potato chips) * 2 (positive- vs. negative- frame) * 2 (wheat image vs. no wheat image) experiment to examine the effects of gluten-free labels on consumers’ perceived healthiness and safety of wheat, perceived benefits of labeled products, and their evaluation of the shown labels. Results showed that consumers evaluate the gluten-free labels most positively when they appear on products that could have contained gluten. For products that are naturally gluten-free, adding a gluten-free label only decreased consumers’ confidence in such labels. The presence of gluten-free labels increased consumers’ perceived benefits of the labeled products when they do not contain any misleading information (e.g., image of a wheat head). However, some gluten-free labels could have negative impacts on consumers’ perceptions of the healthiness and safety of wheat. Overall, food producers and marketers might have undervalued consumers’ literacy and overestimated their susceptibility to marketing strategies. We discussed the implications for food marketers, regulators, and communicators.
Rumble, Joy N. (author), Rogers-Randolph, Tiffany M. (author), Buck, Emily B. (author), and The Ohio State University
University of Florida
Association for Communication Excellence
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2019
Published:
United States: New Prairie Press
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 15 Document Number: D10429
16 pages., Via online journal., The livestock industry has repeatedly struggled to effectively communicate livestock care and handling practices in order to promote awareness and acceptance. Many consumers still hold on to the historically picturesque view of production agriculture instead of the modern reality. It is necessary for the industry to identify how much is too much to tell or show consumers. Therefore, this study sought to understand the influence of two communication treatments on attitudes toward livestock care and use. Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) served as the theoretical framework for this study. A sample of 1,049 respondents was obtained through non-probability sampling. To fulfill the purpose of this study, the development of an online survey was informed by ELM and measured prior beliefs, personal involvement, and knowledge. An experimental treatment, consistent with persuasive communication within ELM, presented respondents with one of two images of cage-free egg laying housing and accompanying text. One image could be described as “historically picturesque” and the other as “modern reality.” Attitude toward livestock care and use was measured after exposure to one of the images. Respondents held favorable prior beliefs, demonstrated neutral involvement, and answered three or less knowledge questions correctly. Respondents exposed to the modern reality treatment displayed slightly lower attitudes than those exposed to the historically picturesque treatment. The results indicated that both prior beliefs and image exposure had a significant impact on attitude, while personal involvement was not found to be significant.
15 pages, via online journal, Scientific innovation provides benefits to society but also fosters suspicion and distrust. The unknown of scientific innovations in agriculture has yielded a strained relationship between consumers and farmers, creating little to no public support for solutions to agricultural issues. The relationship between public trust and agricultural innovation is further strained when discussing genetic modification (GM) science and food. Informational graphics are an increasingly popular communication technique that may effectively communicate GM science to consumers. This study examined, through a experimental design using two treatments and a control, if static or animated infographics sharing current societal perceptions of GM science in the U.S. influenced consumers’ trust in science, personal attitudes toward GM, and perceived attitudes of others toward GM science. The animated group had the highest mean trust in science and the control group had the most positive attitude toward GM and the most positive perceived attitudes of others toward GM. The only significant difference was the control group had a more positive perceived attitude than the animated group. The infographics’ lack of impact on respondents’ trust or attitude toward GM science contradicted previous research about respondents’ increased attitude and elaboration of agricultural issues. Food concerns are of continual importance for consumers, and researchers need to help food and fiber scientists and communicators share relevant and research-based information with the public through diverse channels.
21 pages, Because mothers are the primary grocery shoppers for most households, they play a fundamental role in the food their families eat. As such, it is important to understand their perceptions of potential sources of food safety and nutrition information. This study surveyed young mothers (i.e., 18-40 years old) across the United States to assess their awareness, knowledge, and trust of celebrities and social media influencers who communicate about food-related topics. The list of celebrities and influencers consisted of TV chefs, celebrities and influencers who espouse favorable viewpoints of food and agriculture, and celebrities and influencers who espouse more alternative viewpoints of food and agriculture. Respondents were usually more aware and knowledgeable of the celebrities and chefs than the influencers. They also generally trusted the TV chefs the most. There tended to be small-to-medium positive correlations between a respondents’ knowledge of a celebrity/influencer and their trust of that celebrity/influencer but not all were statistically significant. Communicators looking to influence the largest number of people would benefit more from working with celebrities, but social media influencers could still play a role in campaigns that target specific online communities where the influencers’ values align with community members. More research is recommended to expand to other audiences, as well as assessing other celebrities and influencers. Research can also address how consumers use social media to get food-related information, how trust could be affected by communication using different social media platforms, and content analyses of food-related communication by celebrities and influencers on social media outlets.
