99A-6 |
|
W. QIN and J. L. Brown. Dept. of Food Science, Pennsylvania State Univ., 8 Borland Lab., University Park, PA 16802 The future of genetically engineered (GE) foods is contingent on consumer acceptance. Although many GE crops have been approved by FDA/EPA, consumer acceptance of GE foods remains low and depends on the specific application. Yet, what determines consumer opinions is rarely studied, and depicting consumer perceptions of a specific application is still difficult. Lack of acceptance to GE foods has been attributed to lack of knowledge about genetic engineering. Guidelines are needed for designing information about genetic engineering that can lead to informed opinions. Since GE animals are more likely to generate consumer reactions than GE plants, we explored consumer opinions of GE salmon, which is a GE animal likely to first enter the US food system. Our objectives were to examine the determinants of consumer perceptions of GE salmon and the effect of information quantity on these determinants. We collected data through eleven focus group discussions (n=65) using a 2*2 (sex*information) design. Half the groups received basic information about GE salmon and half received basic plus detailed information. Data were tape-recorded, transcribed and analyzed using standard qualitative methods. Consumer perceptions of GE salmon were determined by risk/benefit tradeoffs, product quality, and outrage factors. Both genders listed similar consequences of GE salmon, but females expressed more concerns and less trust of institutions than did males. Detailed information elicited more concerns than did basic information. This is the first study to use a specific animal GE application to examine determinants of consumer risk perceptions. How educators address these determinants may influence acceptance for new GE applications. Comparison of responses to basic and detailed information revealed that more knowledge does not necessarily reduce the objections to GE. Effective risk communication about GE foods may require more attention to the information frame, e.g consequences vs. perspectives, rather than information quantity.
Session 99A, Biotechnology: General
|