What drives risk perceptions? Revisiting public perceptions of food hazards associated with production and consumption

Abstract

As food technology continues to advance, the potential for new food products to enter the food market grows, attracting considerable media interest. Whilst previous research has explored public perceptions of food-related hazards, much of this took place over 10 years ago. Continued technological developments have yielded new food products, for which there is no extant research on public perceptions. In light of this, there is a pressing need to update and extend research exploring public perceptions of food-related hazards. Using a psychometric approach, a nationally representative UK sample (n= 907) provided ratings of 11 old and new food hazards on a total of 12 risk characteristics (identified from previous research). Principal components analysis identified two main components: 'dread' and 'knowledge', which explained 80.8% of the variance in perceptions, consistent with past findings. Additives were perceived as the least dreaded and most known of the hazards considered, whereas ractopamine pork, atrazine corn and hormone beef were dreaded the most. 3D printed food and lab-grown meat were perceived as the least known. Our results highlight the importance of knowledge in shaping risk perceptions and have implications for risk management.An understanding of the factors which determine risk perceptions is vital for the development of effective risk management and risk communication strategies.

Perception of Occupational and Environmental Risks and Hazards among Mineworkers: A Psychometric Paradigm Approach

“…However, those responses with less than 15% missing data were treated by replacing the missing values with the mean ones, as Jenkins et al [ 20 ] suggested. Subsequently, the data were analyzed using the method outlined in [ 20 , 21 , 44 , 45 ]. The screening process has brought the final sample to 345 valid responses.…”

“…The second part of the analysis was conducted using disaggregate-level or hazard-focused analyses. Hence, a series of eight multiple regression analyses using non-aggregated data were conducted to test if the selected qualitative risk characteristics were significant predictors of the participants’ perceived risk [ 21 , 27 ]. Table 4 summarizes the multiple regression analysis results.…”

“…Briefly, in the psychometric approach, individuals are requested to rate their perception of various risks and hazards based on several common risk characteristics identified in previous studies [ 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 ]. Subsequently, a principal component analysis (PCA) was used to reduce the number of proposed characteristics into two main dimensions or factors, frequently identified and named as “dreaded” and “unknown risks.” The former refers to the extent to which a threat is perceived as being dreadful, uncontrollable, and involuntary, with a catastrophic potential and fatal consequences; however, the latter entails the extent to which an event or hazard is believed to be unobservable, unknown to individuals, unfamiliar, new, and has delayed consequences [ 15 , 17 ].…”

“…The first dimension, “catastrophic potential” is related to characteristics such as “Dread” “Severity of the consequence” and “Catastrophic potential.” The second dimension, “knowledge” is associated with “Knowledge” “Oldness” and “Latency of effect.” Moreover, the third dimension, “involuntariness” encompasses involuntariness and control. The last component, “social and personal exposure” relates to “Number of people exposed” and “Personal effect.” The psychometric approach has been widely used to assess laypeople’s risk perception of various risks and hazards, including food processing technologies [ 10 , 21 , 26 ], social risk [ 27 , 28 ], nuclear energy technologies [ 29 , 30 ], environmental, natural, and climate change-related risks [ 31 , 32 , 33 ], and industrial accidents [ 34 ].…”

The impact of the perceived risk of COVID-19 on consumers' attitude and behavior toward locally produced food

“…In the case of a pandemic, the perception of risk could be based on objective data, such as the number of people infected and deaths, but even more on the Perceived risk of COVID-19 on consumers subjectivity of individuals due to the uncertainty, anxiety and fear produced by the difficulties in controlling the pandemic and its serious consequences (Yildirim and G€ uler, 2020). Numerous studies have used the psychometric paradigm to explain the risk perception of hazards (Bonnet et al, 2012), which consists of two dimensions to assess risk perception in such situations: unknown risk and dread risk (Jenkins et al, 2021). With the aim of avoiding ambiguities, researchers have reframed these dimensions as cognitive and emotional/ affective (Yildirim and G€ uler, 2020).…”