Literature DB >> 18627545

Communicating risks and benefits from fish consumption: impact on Belgian consumers' perception and intention to eat fish.

Wim Verbeke1, Filiep Vanhonacker, Lynn J Frewer, Isabelle Sioen, Stefaan De Henauw, John Van Camp.   

Abstract

Communicating about the health effects of fish and seafood may potentially result in a conflict situation: increasing intake is desirable because of health and nutritional benefits, but higher consumption may also lead to an increased intake of potentially harmful environmental contaminants. In order to anticipate the communication challenge this conflict may pose, the research presented here aimed to assess the impact of risk/benefit communication on Belgian consumers' fish consumption behavior and fish attribute perception. Data were collected in June 2005 from a sample of 381 women, aged between 20 and 50 years. An experimental design consisting of four message conditions (benefit-only; risk-only; benefit-risk; and risk-benefit) combined with three information sources (fish and food industry; consumer organization; government) was used. Exposure to the benefit-only message resulted in an increase from a self-reported fish consumption frequency of 4.2 times per month to an intended fish consumption frequency of 5.1 times per month (+21%), while fish attribute perceptions only marginally improved. The risk-only message resulted in a strong negative perceptual change in the range of two points on a seven-point scale. This translated into an 8% decrease of behavioral intention (from eating fish 4.5 times per month to an intention of eating fish 4.1 times per month). Balanced messages referring to both risks and benefits yielded no significant change in behavioral intention, despite a significant worsening of fish attribute perception. The presentation order of benefits and risks in the balanced message showed a tendency to affect both behavioral intention and attribute perception, with the first message component being most influential. Information source did not yield any significant impact either on behavioral intention or on attribute perceptions, independent of the message content. The results from this study provide valuable insights for future risk/benefit and balanced communication about seafood.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18627545     DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01075.x

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


  14 in total

Review 1.  Policy and science implications of the framing and qualities of uncertainty in risks: toxic and beneficial fish from the Baltic Sea.

Authors:  Timo Assmuth
Journal:  Ambio       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 5.129

2.  Consumption of Fish and Shrimp from Southeast Louisiana Poses No Unacceptable Lifetime Cancer Risks Attributable to High-Priority Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons.

Authors:  Jeffrey K Wickliffe; Bridget Simon-Friedt; Jessi L Howard; Ericka Frahm; Buffy Meyer; Mark J Wilson; Deepa Pangeni; Edward B Overton
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 4.000

3.  Technical assistance in the field of risk communication.

Authors:  Laura Maxim; Mario Mazzocchi; Stephan Van den Broucke; Fabiana Zollo; Tobin Robinson; Claire Rogers; Domagoj Vrbos; Giorgia Zamariola; Anthony Smith
Journal:  EFSA J       Date:  2021-04-29

4.  Fish and rapeseed oil consumption in infants and mothers: dietary habits and determinants in a nationwide sample in Germany.

Authors:  Madlen Stimming; Christina M Mesch; Mathilde Kersting; Lars Libuda
Journal:  Eur J Nutr       Date:  2014-10-18       Impact factor: 5.614

5.  Subclinical responses in healthy cyclists briefly exposed to traffic-related air pollution: an intervention study.

Authors:  Lotte Jacobs; Tim S Nawrot; Bas de Geus; Romain Meeusen; Bart Degraeuwe; Alfred Bernard; Muhammad Sughis; Benoit Nemery; Luc Int Panis
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2010-10-25       Impact factor: 5.984

6.  Trust in Whom? Dioxin, Organizations, Risk Perception, and Fish Consumption in Michigan's Saginaw Bay Watershed.

Authors:  Joseph A Hamm; J Cox; G Zwickle; J Zhuang; S Cruz; B L Upham; M Chung; J W Dearing
Journal:  J Risk Res       Date:  2018-10-11

7.  Development of strategies for effective communication of food risks and benefits across Europe: design and conceptual framework of the FoodRisC project.

Authors:  Julie Barnett; Aine McConnon; Jean Kennedy; Monique Raats; Richard Shepherd; Wim Verbeke; Jon Fletcher; Margôt Kuttschreuter; Luisa Lima; Josephine Wills; Patrick Wall
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2011-05-13       Impact factor: 3.295

Review 8.  Which fish should I eat? Perspectives influencing fish consumption choices.

Authors:  Emily Oken; Anna L Choi; Margaret R Karagas; Koenraad Mariën; Christoph M Rheinberger; Rita Schoeny; Elsie Sunderland; Susan Korrick
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2012-02-22       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 9.  Towards integration of environmental and health impact assessments for wild capture fishing and farmed fish with particular reference to public health and occupational health dimensions.

Authors:  Andrew Watterson; David Little; James A Young; Kathleen Boyd; Ekram Azim; Francis Murray
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.390

Review 10.  Issues of fish consumption for cardiovascular disease risk reduction.

Authors:  Susan K Raatz; Jeffrey T Silverstein; Lisa Jahns; Matthew J Picklo
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2013-03-28       Impact factor: 5.717

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.