Advanced search
1 file | 488.86 KB

Risk/benefit communication about food : a systematic review of the literature

Author
Organization
Abstract
A systematic review relevant to the following research questions was conducted (1) the extent to which different theoretical frameworks have been applied to food risk/benefit communication and (2) the impact such food risk/benefit communication interventions have had on related risk/benefit attitudes and behaviors. Fifty four papers were identified. The analysis revealed that (primarily European or US) research interest has been relatively recent. Certain food issues were of greater interest to researchers than others, perhaps reflecting the occurrence of a crisis, or policy concern. Three broad themes relevant to the development of best practice in risk (benefit) communication were identified: the characteristics of the target population; the contents of the information; and the characteristics of the information sources. Within these themes, independent and dependent variables differed considerably. Overall, acute risk (benefit) communication will require advances in communication process whereas chronic communication needs to identify audience requirements. Both citizen's risk/benefit perceptions and (if relevant) related behaviors need to be taken into account, and recommendations for behavioral change need to be concrete and actionable. The application of theoretical frameworks to the study of risk (benefit) communication was infrequent, and developing predictive models of effective risk (benefit) communication may be contingent on improved theoretical perspectives.
Keywords
food safety, trust, food hazard, benefit communication, risk communication, Risk perception, RISK INFORMATION-SEEKING, FISH CONSUMPTION, PLANNED BEHAVIOR, PERCEPTION, ATTITUDES, BENEFITS, SAFETY, CONSUMER, DISEASE

Downloads

  • WV CritRevFoodSciNutr Frewer etal 2016.pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 488.86 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

Chicago
Frewer, LJ, ARH Fischer, M Brennan, D Bánáti, R Lion, RM Meertens, G Rowe, M Siegrist, Wim Verbeke, and CMJL Vereijken. 2016. “Risk/benefit Communication About Food : a Systematic Review of the Literature.” Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 56 (10): 1728–1745.
APA
Frewer, L., Fischer, A., Brennan, M., Bánáti, D., Lion, R., Meertens, R., Rowe, G., et al. (2016). Risk/benefit communication about food : a systematic review of the literature. CRITICAL REVIEWS IN FOOD SCIENCE AND NUTRITION, 56(10), 1728–1745.
Vancouver
1.
Frewer L, Fischer A, Brennan M, Bánáti D, Lion R, Meertens R, et al. Risk/benefit communication about food : a systematic review of the literature. CRITICAL REVIEWS IN FOOD SCIENCE AND NUTRITION. 2016;56(10):1728–45.
MLA
Frewer, LJ, ARH Fischer, M Brennan, et al. “Risk/benefit Communication About Food : a Systematic Review of the Literature.” CRITICAL REVIEWS IN FOOD SCIENCE AND NUTRITION 56.10 (2016): 1728–1745. Print.
@article{8045751,
  abstract     = {A systematic review relevant to the following research questions was conducted (1) the extent to which different theoretical frameworks have been applied to food risk/benefit communication and (2) the impact such food risk/benefit communication interventions have had on related risk/benefit attitudes and behaviors. Fifty four papers were identified. The analysis revealed that (primarily European or US) research interest has been relatively recent. Certain food issues were of greater interest to researchers than others, perhaps reflecting the occurrence of a crisis, or policy concern. Three broad themes relevant to the development of best practice in risk (benefit) communication were identified: the characteristics of the target population; the contents of the information; and the characteristics of the information sources. Within these themes, independent and dependent variables differed considerably. Overall, acute risk (benefit) communication will require advances in communication process whereas chronic communication needs to identify audience requirements. Both citizen's risk/benefit perceptions and (if relevant) related behaviors need to be taken into account, and recommendations for behavioral change need to be concrete and actionable. The application of theoretical frameworks to the study of risk (benefit) communication was infrequent, and developing predictive models of effective risk (benefit) communication may be contingent on improved theoretical perspectives.},
  author       = {Frewer, LJ and Fischer, ARH and Brennan, M and B{\'a}n{\'a}ti, D and Lion, R and Meertens, RM and Rowe, G and Siegrist, M and Verbeke, Wim and Vereijken, CMJL},
  issn         = {1040-8398},
  journal      = {CRITICAL REVIEWS IN FOOD SCIENCE AND NUTRITION},
  keyword      = {food safety,trust,food hazard,benefit communication,risk communication,Risk perception,RISK INFORMATION-SEEKING,FISH CONSUMPTION,PLANNED BEHAVIOR,PERCEPTION,ATTITUDES,BENEFITS,SAFETY,CONSUMER,DISEASE},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {10},
  pages        = {1728--1745},
  title        = {Risk/benefit communication about food : a systematic review of the literature},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2013.801337},
  volume       = {56},
  year         = {2016},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: