2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2007.02.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Consumer acceptance of technology-based food innovations: Lessons for the future of nutrigenomics

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

21
200
2
13

Year Published

2013
2013
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 287 publications
(236 citation statements)
references
References 84 publications
21
200
2
13
Order By: Relevance
“…The link between the acceptance of the technologies in the organization, and the way systems are implemented can lead to resistance of change issues, which users can find increasingly difficult to deal with, as political issues as a well as institutional factors can influence this resistance of the systems [18]. The way users accept the new technology is often also based on the political settings within the organization, and therefore can influence the perceived benefits of any new system [19]- [21]. There is evidence to suggest the way in which the benefits are perceived is also linked to the response which users give to training and support for the new system, and therefore there is a need for proper communication to initiate and lower the possible resistance to change [16], [12].…”
Section: Technology Acceptance Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The link between the acceptance of the technologies in the organization, and the way systems are implemented can lead to resistance of change issues, which users can find increasingly difficult to deal with, as political issues as a well as institutional factors can influence this resistance of the systems [18]. The way users accept the new technology is often also based on the political settings within the organization, and therefore can influence the perceived benefits of any new system [19]- [21]. There is evidence to suggest the way in which the benefits are perceived is also linked to the response which users give to training and support for the new system, and therefore there is a need for proper communication to initiate and lower the possible resistance to change [16], [12].…”
Section: Technology Acceptance Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The means of communication influence which of the characteristics and which of the psychological processes have the strongest influence on consumer acceptance. Hence, acceptance is primarily explained by the end users' interpretation of the technology, including their moral beliefs about it (Ronteltap et al 2007;Sjöberg 2005). In the case of nutrigenomics, studies indicate that it would be beneficial for public acceptance if expert stakeholders were to communicate unanimously about the technology, if the actual spin-off products provided clearly recognizable advantages to the consumer, and if the technology could be easily implemented in daily life.…”
Section: Consumers and New Technologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The seven categories are also related directly or indirectly to issues of communication; risk and benefit perception; safety, quality, and cost; trust and social norms; public knowledge; and psychological factors such as naturalness that have been identified in studies on consumer or societal acceptance of novel food and technology (e.g., Costa-Font et al, 2008;Ronteltap et al, 2007;Siegrist, 2008). Though the research described in this paper did not set out to translate the findings in those studies into specific organizational strategies, that was one of the results.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The importance of public opinion and perception in obtaining legitimacy for new technologies has been illustrated in studies on genetically modified organisms (GMOs), biotechnology, and nutrigenomics (Gostek, 2016;Ronteltap et al, 2007;Sylvester et al, 2009). Sectors with novel innovations in food must navigate the bumpy terrain of introducing change in current food production and consumption patterns within a cautious legal and public climate.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%