Consumer reactions to unfamiliar technologies: mental and social formation of perceptions and attitudes toward nano and GM products

Abstract

Using focus groups, the research analyses the mental and social processes through which consumers form perceptions and opinions about unfamiliar technologies and the derived products, taking the perception of nanotechnology and nano-products, GM and GM products as example. Our findings suggest that limited understanding of the technological principles and lack of (visible) products prevent the formation of experience-based attitudes and behavioral intentions. In this context, consumers interpret and assess cognitive interventions such as product labels or product information, as well as the trustworthiness of unfamiliar information sources, based on heuristic clues, association, mutual reassurance and previous attitudes. The established determinants of technology risk perception (e.g. knowledge, social norms, perceived risks and benefits and controllability) were the subject of constant deliberation and negotiation among participants. Consequently, the perception of risk and technology communication interventions might vary greatly across different locations and segments of the public, complicating risk communication and trust-building.     

Critical factors and pathways influencing genetically modified food risk perceptions

This study aims to identify the critical factors and paths that affect the Chinese public’s risk perceptions of genetically modified (GM) foods from an emotional appraisal perspective. Using an experiment conducted with university undergraduate business students in China, we examined the evaluative pathways of the Chinese public by manipulating fairness and controllability appraisals in scenarios constructed about GM foods risk. The experiment was designed around two evaluative pathways – consequentialist and deontological perspectives – focusing on controllability and fairness. This led to a distinct set of emotional responses. It was found that both consequence-based and morality-based emotions caused stronger perceived risks toward GM foods. Understanding these responses provides new insight into how scientists and experts in China might best frame their communications about GM foods.     

Reputational cheap talk

We analyze information reporting by a privately informed expert concerned about being perceived to have accurate information. When the expert's reputation is updated on the basis of the report as well as the realized state, the expert typically does not wish to truthfully reveal the signal observed. The incentives to deviate from truth telling are characterized and shown to depend on the information structure. In equilibrium, experts can credibly communicate only part of their information. Our results also hold when experts have private information about their own accuracy and care about their reputation relative to others.     

Talking aggressively about GMOs? Examining the effect of aggressive risk communication with communicator’s facial expression and gender

Abstract

Two experiments (N = 229 and N = 268) assessed the effect of aggressive risk communication about GMOs by a scientist on respondents’ perceptions of message quality and writer (the scientist communicator) likability. We also considered two factors from the communicator that may influence how individuals process aggressive messages – facial expression (study 1) and the gender (study 2). Both studies showed that aggressive communication has a negative effect on both perceived message quality and writer likability, which is explained by the level of negative expectancy violation individuals perceived. Moreover, study 1 showed that smiling appeared to be a negative influence on the outcomes and study 2 showed that gender did not influence how people perceive aggressive messages. The findings provided both scholarly and practical implications for science and risk communication.     

Modelling Risk Perceptions of Stakeholders in Public–Private Partnership Toll Road Contracts

This paper investigates the risk perceptions of key stakeholder groups typically involved in public–private partnership (PPP) toll roads. Risk perceptions have an important impact on these PPP schemes for investing in public infrastructure. However, the nature and extent of risk associated with the specification of a PPP contract that commits contracting parties to deliver on their obligations remain unclear. In the context of major transport infrastructure, such as a new toll road, the often‐cited key risk to investors is the traffic (and hence demand) risk. There are, however, other risks, including political risk and media risk, the latter often causing untold harm resulting in modifications to the planned infrastructure. This paper develops a method to capture evidence on how public sector and private sector partners involved in previous PPPs perceive the levels of risk associated with each risk attribute, as a way of identifying the ex ante risk setting brought to negotiations in PPP toll road investments. Using a sample of 101 experts with contract experience in 32 countries, we develop a stated choice experiment and estimate a discrete choice model to quantify a risk profile index (RPI) to capture the perceived (relative) influence of each dimension of risk, and then identify sources of systematic differences in the RPI as a way of understanding the influence of personal traits and contextual and contractual factors.     

Risk perception of mobile communication: a mental models approach

Some lay people confronted with a new base station project fear serious health consequences from the high‐frequency radiation, while experts consider exposure under the current international standards as unproblematic. These conflictive estimations may be attributed to the different mental models of lay people and experts. Less is known about lay people’s knowledge in regard to mobile communication and their intuitive understanding of the associated health risks. An adaptation of the ‘Mental Models Approach’ was used to reveal lay people’s beliefs about mobile communication and to learn more about lay people’s information requirements, potential knowledge gaps, and misconceptions. Through the means of open interviews with Swiss experts (N = 16), lay people (N = 16), and base station opponents (N = 15), different mental models were constructed and evaluated. Comparisons between the expert and the lay groups showed several qualitative differences in all identified knowledge domains. Knowledge gaps in regard to changing exposure magnitudes due to the interaction patterns of cell phones and base stations as well as misconceptions about regulation issues and scientific processes were found in both lay groups. In addition, lack of trust in responsible actors and disaffection with base station location processes were mentioned. The reported qualitative insights may be useful for the improvement of further risk communication tools.     

Transparency in the food aisle: the influence of procedural justice on views about labeling GM foods

Issues of transparency lay at the center of the debate surrounding the labeling of genetically modified (GM) food products in the USA. These issues include not only the argument that consumers should be allowed to make purchasing choices based on full disclosure of product ingredients but also that they should have access to the process that makes decisions about labeling. This study examines the influence of procedural justice on perceived decision legitimacy and decision support regarding GM food labeling decisions. Using a 2 × 2 factorial design, participants recruited from an online Qualtrics panel (N = 450) were randomly assigned to read a fictitious news article about an agricultural company’s decision about whether to label their food products as having GM ingredients. Articles varied by the company’s labeling decision (label versus no label) and whether the company listened to public input prior to making the decision (public input versus no public input). The results showed significant main effects on decision support and perceived legitimacy for articles that mentioned public input. Specifically, when participants read articles stating that the company made its decision after listening to public input, they were more supportive of the decision and perceived the decision as more legitimate. Moreover, this main effect occurred irrespective of whether or not the company’s decision was to label GM foods. Our results confirm the influence of procedural justice perceptions in fostering support and perceived legitimacy for controversial risk-related decisions.     

Genetic engineering,genetic modification,or agricultural biotechnology: does the term matter?

The risk perception and communication literature appears to use terms such as genetic engineering (GE), genetic modification (GM), and agricultural biotechnology (agbiotech) almost interchangeably. The present research therefore seeks to compare the effect of these three terms on consumers’ cognitive, affective and behavioral component of attitude. The variables under investigation are consumers’ perceptions of risk, benefits, personal control over technology, support and promotion of the development of technology, dread, labeling, and purchase intentions. The study draws on the equivalency framing literature in conducting two question wording experiments whereby participants are randomly assigned to receive a version that uses just one of the three different terms. The first experiment found that the framing effect of food technology as either GE or GM may be contingent on source of information. When the technology was framed as GE and the information source was a consumer organization, respondents reported higher perceived personal control over the technology compared to when the information source was government, newspaper, or no source. Therefore, framing food as GE may be a somewhat beneficial for those who seek to promote the technology while framing the technology as GM might help those who oppose the technology. The second experiment found that using the terms agbiotech and GE were associated with higher perceived benefits, positive feelings, and purchase intention compared to GM. The ‘agbiotech’ term garnered the most relative support for the technology. Implications are discussed.     

How do consumers evaluate risk in financial products?

Decision-making processes consumers use in investing lump sums are reviewed, focusing on how investment risk is perceived and assessed. Primary research was undertaken with investment customers to explore the role played in evaluation of investment risk by risk perceptions and risk propensity. Both the literature review and the research findings indicate the central role risk perceptions play in financial decisions. Sitkin and Weingart's risk model is used as a research framework. Risk propensity and risk perception were found to be negatively correlated, however, deposit accounts were selected for investment irrespective of how risky a respondent considered them to be. Risk perceptions and expected return were positively correlated for all asset types apart from property. Further investigation revealed that experts exhibited positive correlation in risk return judgments but novices showed no correlation. There was no correlation between risk and return for either novices or experts for property. Return expectations were positively correlated with investment allocation. Provision of past performance information appears to create an expectation for future returns around the same level as past returns. Research findings suggest that outcome history is a predictor variable, with a Positive outcome history leading to higher risk Propensity. The level of risk customers are assuming shows a significantly increasing trend.     

Extrapolating understanding of food risk perceptions to emerging food safety cases

Important determinants of risk perceptions associated with foods are the extent to which the potential hazards are perceived to have technological or naturally occurring origins, together with the acute vs. chronic dimension in which the potential hazard is presented (acute or chronic). This study presents a case study analysis based on an extensive literature review examining how these hazard characteristics affect people’s risk and benefit perceptions, and associated attitudes and behaviors. The cases include E. coli incidences (outbreaks linked to fresh spinach and fenugreek sprouts), contamination of fish by environmental pollutants, (organochlorine contaminants in farmed salmon), radioactive contamination of food following a nuclear accident (the Fukushima accident in Japan), and GM salmon destined for the human food chain. The analysis of the cases over the acute vs. chronic dimension suggests that longitudinal quantification of the relationship between risk perceptions and impacts is important for both acute and chronic food safety, but this has infrequently been applied to chronic hazards. Technologies applied to food production tend to potentially be associated with higher levels of risk perception, linked to perceptions that the risk is unnatural. However, for some risks (e.g. those involving biological irreversibility), moral or ethical concerns may be more important determinants of consumer responses than risk or benefit perceptions. (Lack of) trust has been highlighted in all of the cases suggesting transparent and honest risk–benefit communications following the occurrence of a food safety incident. Implications for optimizing associated risk communication strategies, additional research linking risk perception, and other quantitative measures, including comparisons in time and space, are suggested.     

Consideration of the social context of auditors’ reliance on expert system output during evaluation of loan loss reserves

Auditors are accountable for judgments made within the social context of the accounting firm. Tetlock (1985) states that decision makers often use the acceptability heuristic to cope with accountability. According to this heuristic, individuals make decisions which they are reasonably confident will be acceptable by others to whom they are accountable. When auditors form judgments with the aid of expert system output, they must determine the appropriate level of reliance on the expert system output. Since the expert system output is based on the input of experts, auditors may decide the output is ‘acceptable‘ and overrely on the output. In addition, because of the conservative nature of the accounting firm, expert system output which is negative may be viewed as more acceptable than positive output leading to greater overreliance. The results indicate that auditors do overrely on expert system output and rely to a greater degree on output which is negative versus output which is positive. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Book Review

This research examines two modes of assessment of environmental health risks and the transformation of these risks into public health issues while relying on the specific case of well‐water toxicity and mega dose of electromagnetic radiation found in one prosperous town in the center of Israel – Ramat ha‐Sharon. Based on official and scientific documentation and interviews conducted at three time periods with randomly selected town residents from contaminated neighborhoods (N = 169), this study shows the discrepancy between the ‘objective’ experts’ standards for assessing environmental health risks and the public’s subjective perception and evaluation of the impact of these risks on their health and well‐being. Even though, by experts’ standards, the well‐water toxicity remained constant over the three interview sessions, Ramat ha‐Sharon town residents’ subjective levels of concern and perception of risk fluctuated as a function of news media and municipality announcements and residents’ perceived ability to minimize the risk. This study also shows the complex and multidisciplinary nature of environmental health risk assessments and the need to relocate them into the broader socioeconomic and political context in which they are embedded.     

Views of Risk in Sweden: Global Fatalism and Local Control — An Empirical Investigation of Ulrich Beck's Theory of New Risks

Ulrich Beck's theory of risk society has been criticised because there is lack of empirical evidence. By comparing people with different life contexts and experiences, the aim of this study was to investigate how these people view risk, and if ‘new’ risks are perceived differently by different groups in society. Five focus‐group interviews were conducted in Sweden, in 2004/05, with people in rural and urban areas, people with a foreign background and experts. The groups consisted of four people each and lasted for two hours. The results show that ‘new’ risks are not something people worry about; ‘risk’ is associated with personal experiences and life context. This indicates a traditional or at least modern way of viewing risk, and contradicts the idea of a reflexive view of risk. However, a division between the urban versus the rural‐migrant groups appears: the expert‐urban groups show a more global—fatalistic strategy to handle of risk, while the rural—migrant group shows a more traditional approach to risk, where control and the local context are in focus.     

Changes in perceptions of risk and competence among beginning scuba divers

The adventure experience paradigm theorizes that individuals engaging in high‐risk recreation exhibit changes in perceptions of risk and competence. While previous research has examined changes in perceptions for individuals engaged in short‐term, high‐risk recreation, there is no research examining patterns of perceptual change through extended involvement in risk recreation activities. The purpose of this study was to examine changes in perceived risk and perceived competence throughout a 14‐week basic scuba diving course. Participants (n = 57) completed the dimensions of an adventure experience (DAE) at the start and end of the course as well as before and after their first time on scuba, first open water dive, and first off shore dive. Changes in perceived risk and perceived competence were examined. Results indicated a significant decrease in perceived risk and a significant increase in both competence factors (attitudes and abilities) pre‐to‐post course and at most time intervals. Although statistically significant, changes in perceived risk and attitude may be of less practical significance (around 0.6 on a 10‐point scale). However, perceived ability increased more noticeably (2.6 on a 10‐point scale). The findings of this study support and further confirm the literature, which indicates repeated involvement in high‐risk recreation decreases participants' perceptions of risk and increases perceptions of competence. Recommendations include further study of DAE psychometrics and research on how changes in perceptions of risk and competence are related to outcomes in adventure recreation.     

Perceived health risks and perceptions of expert consensus in modern food society

The article deals with perceptions of food and health risks. Relevant questions are: (1) To what degree do consumers associate specific negative health consequences with food additives and genetically modified food, and do their perceptions differ from the experts’ views? (2) How do consumers perceive experts’ evaluations of health risks connected to food additives and genetically modified food? The results are based on a survey of Norwegian residents in 1999/2000, and of a selected sample of Norwegian experts on food and risks. There were great differences between consumers and experts in their assessments of health risks. To varying extents, consumers associate various health consequences with the risk factors. Consumers seem to perceive experts as more united about the risk factors as health risks than experts do themselves. The findings are discussed with reference to the stigma concept and to a social constructionist perspective. The results contribute to the understanding of consumer perception of risks and their understanding of expert agreement about health risks. They also point to the importance of the interplay between consumers and experts in the public debate and communication process about food and risks.     

Entrepreneurs and new ideas

We study how early‐stage new ideas are turned into successful businesses. Even promising ideas can be unprofitable if they fail on one dimension, such as technical feasibility, correspondence to market demand, legality, or patentability. To screen good ideas, the entrepreneur needs to hire experts who evaluate the idea along their dimensions of expertise. Sharing the idea, however, creates the risk that the expert would steal it. Yet, the idea‐thief cannot contact any other expert, lest he should in turn steal the idea. Thus, stealing leads to incomplete screening and is unattractive if the information of the other expert is critical and highly complementary. In such cases, the entrepreneur can form a partnership with the experts, thus granting them the advantage of accessing each other's information. Yet, very valuable ideas cannot be shared because it is too tempting to steal them.     

Consumers’ avoidance of information on red meat risks: information exposure effects on attitudes and perceived knowledge

In accordance with cognitive dissonance theory, individuals generally avoid information that is not consistent with their cognitions, to avoid psychological discomfort associated with tensions arising from contradictory beliefs. Information avoidance may thus make risk communication less successful. To address this, we presented information on red meat risks to red meat consumers. To explore information exposure effects, attitudes toward red meat and perceived knowledge of red meat risks were measured before, immediately after, and two weeks after exposure. We expected information avoidance of red meat risks to be: positively related to (1) study discontentment; and (2) positive attitudes toward red meat; and negatively related to (3) information seeking on red meat risks; and (4) systematic and heuristic processing of information. In addition, following exposure to the risk information, we expected that (5) individuals who scored high in avoidance of red meat risks information to change their attitudes and perceived risk knowledge less than individuals who scored low in avoidance. Results were in line with the first three expectations. Support for the fourth was partial insofar as this was only confirmed regarding systematic processing. The final prediction was not confirmed; individuals who scored high in avoidance decreased the positivity of their attitudes and increased their perceived knowledge in a similar fashion to those who scored low in avoidance. These changes stood over the two-week follow-up period. Results are discussed in accordance with cognitive dissonance theory, with the possible use of suppression strategies, and with the corresponding implications for risk communication practice.     

The roles of reputation and transparency on the behavior of biased experts

We analyze situations in which an expert is biased toward some decision but cares also about his reputation in the market for experts. The information the expert reveals decreases as his bias moves toward stronger preferences for the status quo. Surprisingly, revealing the intensity of the expert’s bias does not always improve the information he reveals in equilibrium. The presence of a second expert raises the first expert’s incentives to report truthfully when the market can identify the contribution of each expert, but reduces them when only the collective contribution is identified by the market.