Differences in consumers' perceptions based on the description order/amount of benefit–risk information on foods: a randomized comparative survey in Japan

Author:

Tanemura NanaeORCID,Kakizaki MasakoORCID,Kusumi Takashi,Onodera Rie,Tominaga Yoshiko,Araki Michihiro,Chiba TsuyoshiORCID

Abstract

PurposeIn this study, the authors clarified the differences in consumers' benefit–risk perceptions based on changes (description order and amount) in the benefit–risk information after an assessment of the health impact of foods.Design/methodology/approachThe authors set the following four benefit–risk information groups relating to fatty fish consumption—Group 1: benefit/simple–risk/detail; Group 2: risk/detail–benefit/simple; Group 3: benefit/detail–risk/detail; Group 4: risk/detail–benefit/detail. The authors conducted a randomized controlled study on June, 2022, involving 7,200 Japanese consumers aged over 18 years.FindingsThere were no significant differences in the risk and benefit perceptions. Furthermore, the logistic regression analysis identified women and benefit perception as significant influencing factors of “no-risk acceptance.”Originality/valueThis study found that all four message formats were acceptable to consumers due to high-benefit/low-risk perceptions. However, despite the difference in message types used in benefit–risk communication, there was no effect on risk acceptance among consumers. Public agencies should design their communication with considerations toward women and benefit perceptions.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Food Science,Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)

Reference22 articles.

1. Crime as risk taking;Psychology, Crime and Law,2012

2. Fagerlin, A. and Peters, E. (2011), “Chapter 7: quantitative information”, in Fischhoff, B., Brewer, N.T. and Downs, J.S. (Eds), Communicating Risks and Benefits: an Evidence-Based User's Guide, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD.

3. Gender, race, and perceived risk: the ‘white male’ effect;Health, Risk and Society,2000

4. Subjective numeracy and the influence of order and amount of audible information on perceived medication value;Medical Decision Making,2017

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3