2005
DOI: 10.1079/phn2004697
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Consumer perception versus scientific evidence about health benefits and safety risks from fish consumption

Abstract: Objective: To investigate the gap between consumer perception and scientific evidence related to health benefits and safety risks from fish consumption. Design: Consumer perceptions from a cross-sectional survey in March 2003 in Belgium were compared with scientific evidence based on a literature review. Method: A quota sampling procedure was used with age as quota control variable. Subjects completed a self-administered questionnaire including health benefit beliefs from fish, fish content and effect beliefs … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

11
128
2
3

Year Published

2006
2006
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 208 publications
(144 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
11
128
2
3
Order By: Relevance
“…that nearly one third of respondents cited this type of fish as one of the priorities in consumption. The second one is carp (26.7%) and the third one is hake (26.0%) ( Regardless of what type of fish, the respondents believe (90%) that the fish is a healthy product, provided that women have stronger attitude on fish as a healthy food (48%) in terms of nutritional importance, which is in accordance with the results of Verbeke et al (2005). Only 10% of respondents did not have a defined position on fish as a healthy food.…”
Section: The Frequency Of Purchase and Type Of Fishsupporting
confidence: 78%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…that nearly one third of respondents cited this type of fish as one of the priorities in consumption. The second one is carp (26.7%) and the third one is hake (26.0%) ( Regardless of what type of fish, the respondents believe (90%) that the fish is a healthy product, provided that women have stronger attitude on fish as a healthy food (48%) in terms of nutritional importance, which is in accordance with the results of Verbeke et al (2005). Only 10% of respondents did not have a defined position on fish as a healthy food.…”
Section: The Frequency Of Purchase and Type Of Fishsupporting
confidence: 78%
“…The same study confirms that consumption of fish increases, despite an increase in its prices. In Belgium, according to Verbeke et al (2005), consumers have a strong belief that the fish are healthy and nutritious, and women eat fish more often than men. Rizoff et al (2015) found that household size has both a negative and a positive revenue impact on the consumption patterns of fish and meat in Slovakia.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, it was found that between 67% (in Belgium and Poland) and 40% (in Denmark) of the consumers wrongly believed that 'Fish is a source of dietary fibre'. Similar gaps in consumers' objective knowledge about fish have previously been reported based on a Belgian consumer sample (36) . Most importantly, subjective knowledge was found to be a better predictor of fish consumption as compared with objective knowledge.…”
Section: Role Of Knowledgementioning
confidence: 58%
“…In general, consumer's awareness of the potential risk posed by pollutants is higher than their awareness of the benefits of fish consumption (Verbeke et al, 2005). All 50 U.S. states as well as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and Food and Drug Administration issue separate advisories on fish consumption due to the presence of these pollutants.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%