IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/saea16/230106.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Changing Food Safety Risk Perceptions: The Influence of Message Framings & Media Food Safety Information

Author

Listed:
  • Britwum, Kofi
  • Yiannaka, Amalia

Abstract

Human cases of E. coli O157:H7 infections linked to the consumption of contaminated beef products consistently receive public attention due to their far-reaching health and economic implications. As consumers’ risk attitudes and perceptions remain pivotal to beef food safety initiatives, the study seeks to investigate the role of message framings and media food safety information on consumers’ valuation of their risk of an E. coli food infection, and attitudes towards food safety technologies. Using a nationally representative sample of 1,842 residents across the US, respondents were randomly assigned into six information groups. Findings reveal that message framings, particularly loss-framed messages influence consumers’ perceived risks, and attitudes towards food safety interventions. Respondents who received the media story about the plight of a consumer who suffered an E. coli infection showed more concern about the risk of an infection, while those who received loss-framed information were in general more accepting of food safety interventions such as vaccines and direct fed microbials. These findings could help the beef industry and policy makers develop effective food safety communication strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Britwum, Kofi & Yiannaka, Amalia, 2016. "Changing Food Safety Risk Perceptions: The Influence of Message Framings & Media Food Safety Information," 2016 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2016, San Antonio, Texas 230106, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:saea16:230106
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.230106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/230106/files/Changing%20Food%20Safety%20Risk%20Perceptions%20-%20Influence%20of%20message%20framings.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.230106?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Glynn T. Tonsor & Ted C. Schroeder & Joost M. E. Pennings, 2009. "Factors Impacting Food Safety Risk Perceptions," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 625-644, September.
    2. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Jin, Hyun Joung & Han, Dae Hee, 2014. "Interaction between message framing and consumers’ prior subjective knowledge regarding food safety issues," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 95-102.
    4. Ganzach, Yoav & Weber, Yaacov & Or, Pinchas Ben, 1997. "Message framing and buying behavior: On the difference between artificial and natural environment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 91-95, October.
    5. Robin Dillaway & Kent D. Messer & John C. Bernard & Harry M. Kaiser, 2011. "Do Consumer Responses to Media Food Safety Information Last?," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 363-383.
    6. Calvin, Linda, 2007. "Outbreak Linked to Spinach Forces Reassessment of Food Safety Practices," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, pages 1-8, June.
    7. Nicholas C. Barberis, 2013. "Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 173-196, Winter.
    8. A. Colin Cameron & Pravin K. Trivedi, 2010. "Microeconometrics Using Stata, Revised Edition," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, number musr, March.
    9. Ganzach, Yoav & Karsahi, Nili, 1995. "Message framing and buying behavior: A field experiment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 11-17, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dolgopolova, Irina & Li, Bingqing & Pirhonen, Helena & Roosen, Jutta, 2021. "The effect of attribute framing on consumers’ attitudes and intentions toward food: A Meta-analysis," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 10(4), December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Britwum, Kofi & Yiannaka, Amalia, 2019. "Consumer willingness to pay for food safety interventions: The role of message framing and issue involvement," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 1-1.
    2. Sandro Casal & Nives DellaValle & Luigi Mittone & Ivan Soraperra, 2017. "Feedback and efficient behavior," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-21, April.
    3. Heribert Gierl & Roland Helm & Michaela Satzinger, 2000. "Die Wirkung positiver und negativer Aussagen in der Werbung vor dem Hintergrund des Message Framing," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 234-256, May.
    4. José F. Tudón M., 2019. "Perception, utility, and evolution," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 7(2), pages 191-208, December.
    5. Shoshan, Vered & Hazan, Tamir & Plonsky, Ori, 2023. "BEAST-Net: Learning novel behavioral insights using a neural network adaptation of a behavioral model," OSF Preprints kaeny, Center for Open Science.
    6. Marianne Bertrand & Dean S. Karlan & Sendhil Mullainathan & Eldar Shafir & Jonathan Zinman, 2005. "What's Psychology Worth? A Field Experiment in the Consumer Credit Market," Working Papers 918, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    7. Carolin Bock & Maximilian Schmidt, 2015. "Should I stay, or should I go? – How fund dynamics influence venture capital exit decisions," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 68-82, November.
    8. Hong, Yan-Zhen & Su, Yi-Ju & Chang, Hung-Hao, 2023. "Analyzing the relationship between income and life satisfaction of Forest farm households - a behavioral economics approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    9. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim, 2024. "Consideration sets and reference points in a dynamic bargaining game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 381-403.
    10. Felici, Marco & Kenny, Geoff & Friz, Roberta, 2023. "Consumer savings behaviour at low and negative interest rates," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    11. Klein, Martin & Deissenroth, Marc, 2017. "When do households invest in solar photovoltaics? An application of prospect theory," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 270-278.
    12. Dominika Czyz & Karolina Safarzynska, 2023. "Catastrophic Damages and the Optimal Carbon Tax Under Loss Aversion," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 85(2), pages 303-340, June.
    13. Alex Imas & Sally Sadoff & Anya Samek, 2017. "Do People Anticipate Loss Aversion?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1271-1284, May.
    14. Nilsson, Jerker & Helgesson, Matilda & Rommel, Jens & Svensson, Ellinor, 2020. "Forest-owner support for their cooperative's provision of public goods," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    15. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    16. Carpentier, A. & Reboud, X., 2018. "Why farmers consider pesticides the ultimate in crop protection: economic and behavioral insights," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277528, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Bryce McLaughlin & Jann Spiess, 2022. "Algorithmic Assistance with Recommendation-Dependent Preferences," Papers 2208.07626, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    18. Mariya Burdina & Scott Hiller, 2021. "When Falling Just Short is a Good Thing: The Effect of Past Performance on Improvement," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 22(7), pages 777-798, October.
    19. Sanjit Dhami & Narges Hajimoladarvish, 2020. "Mental Accounting, Loss Aversion, and Tax Evasion: Theory and Evidence," CESifo Working Paper Series 8606, CESifo.
    20. Häckel, Björn & Pfosser, Stefan & Tränkler, Timm, 2017. "Explaining the energy efficiency gap - Expected Utility Theory versus Cumulative Prospect Theory," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 414-426.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:saea16:230106. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/saeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.