IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/gunwpe/0246.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What do friends and media tell us? How different information channels affect women’s risk perceptions of age-related female infertility

Author

Listed:
  • Lampi, Elina

    (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University)

Abstract

Based on a survey given to a random sample of Swedish 20-40 year old females, this paper investigates through which channels women receive information about the general risk levels of age-related female infertility and how the different channels affect women’s perceptions of the risk. We find that the media reach women of all ages, while only about one woman in four has received information from the health care system. We also found that what peers say and do strongly affect women’s risk perceptions: The respondents who had obtained information from friends and relatives were more likely to state too high risks, while a woman with close friends or relatives who became pregnant at age 35 or older was more likely to have a correct perception of the risks. Since women are most interested in receiving information from the health care system, we argue that health care workers should inform women earlier than what happens today.

Suggested Citation

  • Lampi, Elina, 2007. "What do friends and media tell us? How different information channels affect women’s risk perceptions of age-related female infertility," Working Papers in Economics 246, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics, revised 28 Apr 2008.
    • Handle: RePEc:hhs:gunwpe:0246
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/2077/3163
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anders A F Wahlberg & Lennart Sjoberg, 2000. "Risk perception and the media," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 31-50, January.
    2. Siv Gustafsson, 2005. "Having Kids Later. Economic Analyses for Industrialized Countries," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 5-16, December.
    3. Roger E. Kasperson & Ortwin Renn & Paul Slovic & Halina S. Brown & Jacque Emel & Robert Goble & Jeanne X. Kasperson & Samuel Ratick, 1988. "The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 177-187, June.
    4. Adam Burgess, 2010. "Media risk campaigning in the UK: from mobile phones to 'Baby P'," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 59-72, January.
    5. Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2005. "Self-Confidence and Personal Motivation," International Economic Association Series, in: Bina Agarwal & Alessandro Vercelli (ed.), Psychology, Rationality and Economic Behaviour, chapter 2, pages 19-57, Palgrave Macmillan.
    6. Lynn J. Frewer & Susan Miles & Roy Marsh, 2002. "The Media and Genetically Modified Foods: Evidence in Support of Social Amplification of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 701-711, August.
    7. Hui-Shung Chang & Henry W. Kinnucan, 1991. "Advertising, Information, and Product Quality: The Case of Butter," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(4), pages 1195-1203.
    8. Lampi, Elina, 2006. "Age-related risk of female infertility: A comparison between perceived personal and general risks," Working Papers in Economics 231, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics, revised 09 Apr 2008.
    9. Steven Martin, 2000. "Diverging fertility among U.S. women who delay childbearing past age 30," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 37(4), pages 523-533, November.
    10. Siv Gustafsson & Seble Worku, 2005. "Assortative Mating by Education and Postponement of Couple Formation and First Birth in Britain and Sweden," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 91-113, November.
    11. Charles F. Manski, 2004. "Measuring Expectations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(5), pages 1329-1376, September.
    12. Janneke De Jonge & Hans Van Trijp & Reint Jan Renes & Lynn J. Frewer, 2010. "Consumer Confidence in the Safety of Food and Newspaper Coverage of Food Safety Issues: A Longitudinal Perspective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1), pages 125-142, January.
    13. Verbeke, Wim & Ward, Ronald W., 2001. "A fresh meat almost ideal demand system incorporating negative TV press and advertising impact," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 25(2-3), pages 359-374, September.
    14. Nicholas E. Piggott & Thomas L. Marsh, 2004. "Does Food Safety Information Impact U.S. Meat Demand?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 154-174.
    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. Caroline Sten Hartnett & Rachel Margolis, 2019. "Births that are Later-than-Desired: Correlates and Consequences," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 38(4), pages 483-505, August.

    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. Yadavalli, Anita & Jones, Keithly, 2014. "Does media influence consumer demand? The case of lean finely textured beef in the United States," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P1), pages 219-227.
    2. Martin Browning & Lars Gårn Hansen & Sinne Smed, 2013. "Rational inattention or rational overreaction? Consumer reactions to health news," IFRO Working Paper 2013/14, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    3. Erdem, Seda & Rigby, Dan, 2011. "Using Best Worst Scaling To Investigate Perceptions Of Control & Concern Over Food And Non-Food Risks," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108790, Agricultural Economics Society.
    4. Hannah Brenkert‐Smith & Katherine L. Dickinson & Patricia A. Champ & Nicholas Flores, 2013. "Social Amplification of Wildfire Risk: The Role of Social Interactions and Information Sources," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(5), pages 800-817, May.
    5. Jamie K. Wardman & Ragnar Löfstedt, 2018. "Anticipating or Accommodating to Public Concern? Risk Amplification and the Politics of Precaution Reexamined," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1802-1819, September.
    6. Ik Jae Chung, 2011. "Social Amplification of Risk in the Internet Environment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(12), pages 1883-1896, December.
    7. Xiaowei Wen & Sangluo Sun & Lin Li & Qinying He & Fu-Sheng Tsai, 2019. "Avian Influenza—Factors Affecting Consumers’ Purchase Intentions toward Poultry Products," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-13, October.
    8. Radwan, Amr & Gil, Jose Maria & Ben Kaabia, Monia & Serra, Teresa, 2008. "Modeling The Impact Of Food Safety Information On Meat Demand In Spain," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6672, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Aye Chan Myae & Ellen Goddard, 2020. "Household behavior with respect to meat consumption in the presence of BSE and CWD," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(3), pages 315-341, September.
    10. Rieger, Jörg & Kuhlgatz, Christian & Anders, Sven, 2016. "Food scandals, media attention and habit persistence among desensitised meat consumers," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 82-92.
    11. Mazzocchi, Mario & Lobb, Alexandra E., 2005. "A Latent-Variable Approach to Modelling Multiple and Resurgent Meat Scares in Italy," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24509, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Vilella-Vila, Marta & Costa-Font, Joan, 2008. "Press media reporting effects on risk perceptions and attitudes towards genetically modified (GM) food," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 2095-2106, October.
    13. María Davia & Nuria Legazpe, 2015. "Educational attainment and maternity in Spain: not only “when” but also “how”," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 871-900, December.
    14. Hattori, Keisuke & Higashida, Keisaku, 2014. "Misleading advertising and minimum quality standards," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 1-14.
    15. Islam Hassouneh & Teresa Serra & José M. Gil, 2010. "Price transmission in the Spanish bovine sector: the BSE effect," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(1), pages 33-42, January.
    16. Emmanuel Songsore & Michael Buzzelli, 2016. "Ontario’s Experience of Wind Energy Development as Seen through the Lens of Human Health and Environmental Justice," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, July.
    17. Zijun Luo & Xu Tian, 2018. "Can China’s meat imports be sustainable? A case study of mad cow disease," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(9), pages 1022-1042, February.
    18. Irz, Xavier & Mazzocchi, Mario & Réquillart, Vincent & Soler, Louis-Georges, 2015. "Research in Food Economics: past trends and new challenges," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 96(01), pages 187-237, March.
    19. aus dem Moore, Nils & Brehm, Johannes & Breidenbach, Philipp & Ghosh, Arijit & Gruhl, Henri, 2022. "Flood risk perception after indirect flooding experience: Null results in the German housing market," Ruhr Economic Papers 976, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    20. Nicoletta Balbo & Francesco C. Billari & Melinda Mills, 2013. "Fertility in Advanced Societies: A Review of Research," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-38, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Information; Media; Health care; Infertility; General risk;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General
    • J13 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Fertility; Family Planning; Child Care; Children; Youth

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hhs:gunwpe:0246. 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: Jessica Oscarsson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/naiguse.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.