Literature DB >> 12224744

The media and genetically modified foods: evidence in support of social amplification of risk.

Lynn J Frewer1, Susan Miles, Roy Marsh.   

Abstract

Empirical examinations of the "social amplification of risk" framework are rare, partly because of the difficulties in predicting when conditions likely to result in amplification effects will occur. This means that it is difficult to examine changes in risk perception that are contemporaneous with increases and/or decreases in social or media discussion of the risks associated with a particular risk event. However, the collection of attitude data before, during, and after the increased reporting of the risks of genetically modified food in the United Kingdom (spring 1999) has demonstrated that people's risk perceptions do increase and decrease in line with what might be expected upon examination of the amplification and attenuation mechanisms integral to the framework. Perceptions of benefit, however, appeared to be permanently depressed by negative reporting about genetically modified food. Trust in regulatory institutions with responsibility for protecting the public was not affected. It was concluded that the social amplification of risk framework is a useful framework for beginning to explain the potential impact on risk perceptions of a risk event, particularly if that risk event is presented to the public as a new hazard occurring in a crisis context.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12224744     DOI: 10.1111/0272-4332.00062

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Risk Anal        ISSN: 0272-4332            Impact factor:   4.000


  24 in total

1.  Principles of risk perception applied to gene technology.

Authors:  Lennart Sjöberg
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 8.807

2.  Ethical Discourse about the Modification of Food for Therapeutic Purposes: How Patients with Gastrointestinal Diseases View the Good, the Bad, and the Healthy.

Authors:  Krista L Harrison; Gail Geller; Patricia Marshall; Jon Tilburt; Marybeth Mercer; Margaret A Brinich; Janelle Highland; Ruth M Farrell; Richard R Sharp
Journal:  AJOB Prim Res       Date:  2012-06-19

3.  The 2008 US beef scare episode in South Korea: analysis of an unusual public reaction.

Authors:  Hyun J Jin
Journal:  J Public Health Policy       Date:  2014-08-28       Impact factor: 2.222

Review 4.  Public Acceptance of Plant Biotechnology and GM Crops.

Authors:  Jan M Lucht
Journal:  Viruses       Date:  2015-07-30       Impact factor: 5.048

5.  Ontario's Experience of Wind Energy Development as Seen through the Lens of Human Health and Environmental Justice.

Authors:  Emmanuel Songsore; Michael Buzzelli
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2016-07-06       Impact factor: 3.390

6.  Relationships among trust in messages, risk perception, and risk reduction preferences based upon avian influenza in Taiwan.

Authors:  David Fang; Chen-Ling Fang; Bi-Kun Tsai; Li-Chi Lan; Wen-Shan Hsu
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2012-08-02       Impact factor: 3.390

7.  Medicine in the popular press: the influence of the media on perceptions of disease.

Authors:  Meredith E Young; Geoffrey R Norman; Karin R Humphreys
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2008-10-29       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  The role of medical language in changing public perceptions of illness.

Authors:  Meredith E Young; Geoffrey R Norman; Karin R Humphreys
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2008-12-08       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Potential sources of bias in the use of individual's recall of the frequency of exposure to air pollution for use in exposure assessment in epidemiological studies: a cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Paul R Hunter; Karen Bickerstaff; Maria A Davies
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2004-03-31       Impact factor: 5.984

10.  Primary care nurses' experiences of how the mass media influence frontline healthcare in the UK.

Authors:  Jennifer E van Bekkum; Shona Hilton
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2013-11-24       Impact factor: 2.497

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.