Literature DB >> 16297228

Who does the public trust? The case of genetically modified food in the United States.

John T Lang1, William K Hallman.   

Abstract

Trust is important for the perception of many types of risk, including those relating to genetically modified (GM) food. Who the public trusts in any given circumstance, however, is not well understood. In this study of public trust regarding GM food, an exploratory factor analysis with Promax rotation reveals public classification of three common institutional types-evaluators, watchdogs, and merchants. The structure of relationships among these stakeholders can act to enable or constrain public support for this new technology. Evaluators-scientists, universities, and medical professionals-are the most trusted. Watchdogs-consumer advocacy organizations, environmental organizations, and media sources-are moderately trusted. Merchants-grocers and grocery stores, industry, and farmers-are least trusted. While the federal government is seen as closest to being an evaluator, it is not highly correlated with any of the factors. The lack of trust in the organizations with the greatest resources and responsibilities for ensuring the safety of GM food should be seen as an important obstacle to the adoption of the technology.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16297228     DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00668.x

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


  11 in total

1.  Hype and public trust in science.

Authors:  Zubin Master; David B Resnik
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2011-11-02       Impact factor: 3.525

Review 2.  Consumer perception of genetically modified organisms and sources of information.

Authors:  Shahla Wunderlich; Kelsey A Gatto
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2015-11-13       Impact factor: 8.701

3.  A study on the risk perception of light pollution and the process of social amplification of risk in Korea.

Authors:  Kyung Hee Kim; Jae Wook Choi; Eunil Lee; Yong Min Cho; Hyung Rae Ahn
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2015-02-05       Impact factor: 4.223

4.  'Someone should oversee it': patient perspectives on the ethical issues arising with the regulation of probiotics.

Authors:  Krista L Harrison; Ruth M Farrell; Margaret A Brinich; Janelle Highland; MaryBeth Mercer; Jennifer B McCormick; Jon Tilburt; Gail Geller; Patricia Marshall; Richard R Sharp
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2012-12-28       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 5.  Public Acceptance of Plant Biotechnology and GM Crops.

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

6.  What Is Trust? Ethics and Risk Governance in Precision Medicine and Predictive Analytics.

Authors:  Afua Adjekum; Marcello Ienca; Effy Vayena
Journal:  OMICS       Date:  2017-12

7.  Product quality risk perceptions and decisions: contaminated pet food and lead-painted toys.

Authors:  Tianjun Feng; L Robin Keller; Liangyan Wang; Yitong Wang
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 4.000

8.  GM trust shaped by trust determinants with the impact of risk/benefit framework: the contingent role of food technology neophobia.

Authors:  Sumran Ali; Muhammad Asim Nawaz; Muhammad Ghufran; Sumaira Nazar Hussain; Aljaifi Saddam Hussein Mohammed
Journal:  GM Crops Food       Date:  2021-01-02       Impact factor: 3.074

9.  Bioengineering microbial communities: Their potential to help, hinder and disgust.

Authors:  Diane Sivasubramaniam; Ashley E Franks
Journal:  Bioengineered       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 3.269

10.  The Effects of Epistemic Trust and Social Trust on Public Acceptance of Genetically Modified Food: An Empirical Study from China.

Authors:  Longji Hu; Rongjin Liu; Wei Zhang; Tian Zhang
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-10-21       Impact factor: 3.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.