Literature DB >> 24732571

Understanding consumer evaluations of personalised nutrition services in terms of the privacy calculus: a qualitative study.

Aleksandra Berezowska1, Arnout R H Fischer, Amber Ronteltap, Sharron Kuznesof, Anna Macready, Rosalind Fallaize, Hans C M van Trijp.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Personalised nutrition (PN) may provide major health benefits to consumers. A potential barrier to the uptake of PN is consumers' reluctance to disclose sensitive information upon which PN is based. This study adopts the privacy calculus to explore how PN service attributes contribute to consumers' privacy risk and personalisation benefit perceptions.
METHODS: Sixteen focus groups (n = 124) were held in 8 EU countries and discussed 9 PN services that differed in terms of personal information, communication channel, service provider, advice justification, scope, frequency, and customer lock-in. Transcripts were content analysed.
RESULTS: The personal information that underpinned PN contributed to both privacy risk perception and personalisation benefit perception. Disclosing information face-to-face mitigated the perception of privacy risk and amplified the perception of personalisation benefit. PN provided by a qualified expert and justified by scientific evidence increased participants' value perception. Enhancing convenience, offering regular face-to face support, and employing customer lock-in strategies were perceived as beneficial.
CONCLUSION: This study suggests that to encourage consumer adoption, PN has to account for face-to-face communication, expert advice providers, support, a lifestyle-change focus, and customised offers. The results provide an initial insight into service attributes that influence consumer adoption of PN.
© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24732571     DOI: 10.1159/000358851

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Public Health Genomics        ISSN: 1662-4246            Impact factor:   2.000


  6 in total

1.  The Impact of Both Individual and Contextual Factors on the Acceptance of Personalized Dietary Advice.

Authors:  Emily P Bouwman; Machiel J Reinders; Joris Galama; Muriel C D Verain
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2022-04-29       Impact factor: 6.706

2.  The perceived impact of the National Health Service on personalised nutrition service delivery among the UK public.

Authors:  Rosalind Fallaize; Anna L Macready; Laurie T Butler; Judi A Ellis; Aleksandra Berezowska; Arnout R H Fischer; Marianne C Walsh; Caroline Gallagher; Barbara J Stewart-Knox; Sharon Kuznesof; Lynn J Frewer; Mike J Gibney; Julie A Lovegrove
Journal:  Br J Nutr       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 3.718

3.  Knowledge and Attitudes Towards Nutrigenetics: Findings from the 2018 Unified Forces Preventive Nutrition Conference (UFPN).

Authors:  Vered Kaufman-Shriqui; Hagit Salem; Mona Boaz; Ruth Birk
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2020-01-27       Impact factor: 5.717

Review 4.  Insights Into the Delivery of Personalized Nutrition: Evidence From Face-To-Face and Web-Based Dietary Interventions.

Authors:  Balquees Al-Awadhi; Rosalind Fallaize; Rodrigo Zenun Franco; Faustina Hwang; Julie A Lovegrove
Journal:  Front Nutr       Date:  2021-01-27

5.  Consumer adoption of personalised nutrition services from the perspective of a risk-benefit trade-off.

Authors:  Aleksandra Berezowska; Arnout R H Fischer; Amber Ronteltap; Ivo A van der Lans; Hans C M van Trijp
Journal:  Genes Nutr       Date:  2015-09-25       Impact factor: 5.523

6.  Consumer acceptance of personalised nutrition: The role of ambivalent feelings and eating context.

Authors:  Machiel J Reinders; Emily P Bouwman; Jos van den Puttelaar; Muriel C D Verain
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-13       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.