Consumers' Evaluations of Genetically Modified Food Messages

Abstract

Consumers are concerned about the risks related to genetically modified (GM) food, and there is a need for agricultural communicators and educators to address those concerns. The purpose of this study was to explore Florida residents' latitudes of acceptance, rejection, and noncommitment toward GM food messages. The findings from this study can be used to guide communication and education campaigns for GM food. An online survey was distributed to a non-probability sample of 500 Florida residents to fulfill the purpose of the study. The messages that most aligned with the respondents' views toward GM food discussed how potential risks related to human health had not been adequately investigated and that GM food may be riskier to consume compared to traditional food. The messages that most opposed the respondents' views were that GM food was safe for consumption and that it caused cancer in humans. People whose views most aligned with the message that GM food caused cancer in humans had the largest latitude of rejection, likely due to their extreme attitude, confirmation bias, and egoinvolvement. The largest percentage of respondents accepted messages that aligned with their position but expressed noncommitment to messages that opposed their views. This lack of rejection and indication of alignment with messages related to potential risk and uncertainty indicated Florida consumers were unsure about the effects of GM food. Communicators and educators should acknowledge these concerns when delivering information about GM food to enhance the effectiveness of communication with consumers.

Correcting Misperceptions About Genetically Modified Food on Social Media: Examining the Impact of Experts, Social Media Heuristics, and the Gateway Belief Model

“…In all conditions, an anonymous Twitter user (named Tyler Johnson 6 ) claimed that scientists “know” GMOs are not safe to eat and shared a meme claiming that most scientists say GMOs are UNSAFE with a picture of a syringe and the phrase “NO GMO” (see the Supplemental Appendix). This claim was specifically chosen because large numbers of people think that “potential risks of GM food related to health have not been adequately investigated” (Ruth & Rumble, 2019, p. 7). In the “Misinformation” condition, there are no responses to this tweet.…”

“…Genetically modified foods consist of foods that have been altered in some way using “technologies used by seed breeders/scientists to make an intentional change to an organism’s DNA in order to promote a desired trait” (Ruth & Rumble, 2019, p. 6). Scientific opinion on the safety of GMF for human consumption is clear: In a 2015 survey of scientist members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 88% of respondents indicated that genetically modified foods were safe to eat (Pew Research Center, 2015).…”

U.S. adult viewers of information treatments express overall positive views but some concerns about gene editing technology

“…In 2015, only 37% of U.S. consumers believed that ingredients from genetically engineered crops were safe for consumption, while 88% of scientist members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science considered human consumption safe [Funk, Rainie & Page, 2015]. We also know that U.S. consumers oppose statements about the safety of genetically engineered food for human consumption when compared to other statements about the advantages and disadvantages of the technology [Ruth & Rumble, 2019].…”

Using Audience Segmentation to Determine Millennial Perceptions toward GM Foods

“…For example, 44% of consumers in the same study said they disapprove of GM animal-sourced food products (Hallman et al, 2016). Results of a GM food messaging study by Ruth and Rumble (2019) found that Florida residents' views most align with statements that GM foods "have not been adequately investigated" and that GM foods "might be riskier to consume than traditional food" (p. 10). In an article summarizing GM knowledge worldwide, Wunderlich and Gatto (2015) reported findings of low consumer knowledge about GM products (Aleksejeva, 2014;Turker et al, 2013, Jurkiewicz et al, 2014 and GM knowledge varies by country (McGarry et al, 2012).…”