DECONSTRUCTING PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF NOVEL FOOD TECHNOLOGIES: HUMAN VALUES AND INFORMATION COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Based on insights of behavioural economics, this thesis aims to provide a more nuanced understanding on determinants of consumers’ acceptance of novel food technologies. In particular, this thesis explores how consumers’ attitudes and food choices related to innovative food technologies are affected by ‘inside’ individual factors, such as underlying human values (i.e., cultural worldviews and food-related values), and ‘outside’ environmental factors, such as the information framing (i.e., narrative communication). Each paper focuses on one particular factor that motivates disparate assessments of food technologies.\n\nEmpirical data on consumers’ food technology attitudes and food choice behaviours were collected from a nation-wide Internet survey administered to 1608 Canadian consumers in 2016. Half of the respondents participated in the Biotechnology version survey, and the other half of respondents completed the Nanotechnology version survey. Both versions of online survey incorporated a choice experiment, where respondents selected their most preferred sliced apple products from a set of hypothetical alternatives. Each paper focuses on particular research questions thus uses different sections of this extensive survey.\n\nPaper 1 explores information framing effects by comparing the effectiveness of using logical-scientific vs. narrative information to communicate about food biotechnology to consumers. A logical-scientific information condition about biotechnology was developed and written in a scientific style using the passive voice with generalized and impersonal language. In contrast, a narrative-style information condition about the technology was written in a more lively and vivid personal style. Respondents were randomly assigned to different information treatments. Results indicate that information about food biotechnology shown in different formats (logical-scientific vs. narrative) or being accessed by respondents in different manners (forced exposure or voluntary choice) can have differing impacts on perceptions and preferences. Compared with logical-scientific information, narratives and/or voluntary information access could help to reduce the opposition to biotechnology.\n\nPaper 2 investigates an alternative psychosocial factor, cultural worldview, which has been underestimated or omitted when examining consumer acceptance of food biotechnology. Individuals’ cultural worldviews were measured by a slightly modified version of cultural cognition scale. Results suggest that individuals holding hierarchical (vs. egalitarian) and communitarian (vs. individualistic) worldviews tend to hold more positive attitudes and be more accepting of agricultural biotechnology.\n\nPaper 3 suggests that intermediary food-related values and their relative importance to consumers have significant powers in explaining attitudes and choices about foods produced by means of nanotechnology. Consumers are heterogeneous in their food values, i.e., they place different importance on food value items such as naturalness, appearance, convenience, safety and novelty. Although Canadian consumers, on average, prefer not to use nanotechnology in sliced apple production, their preferences are heterogeneous. ‘Supporters’ of nanotechnology applied to agriculture and food production are those who consider ‘appearance’ is an important value to food purchase. By contrast, ‘opponents’ tend to emphasize the importance of ‘naturalness’ and ‘origin’.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,010 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle