• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of risk research >Genetic engineering, genetic modification, or agricultural biotechnology: does the term matter?
【24h】

Genetic engineering, genetic modification, or agricultural biotechnology: does the term matter?

机译：基因工程，遗传修改或农业生物技术：术语是否物质？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The risk perception and communication literature appears to use terms such as genetic engineering (GE), genetic modification (GM), and agricultural biotechnology (agbiotech) almost interchangeably. The present research therefore seeks to compare the effect of these three terms on consumers' cognitive, affective and behavioral component of attitude. The variables under investigation are consumers' perceptions of risk, benefits, personal control over technology, support and promotion of the development of technology, dread, labeling, and purchase intentions. The study draws on the equivalency framing literature in conducting two question wording experiments whereby participants are randomly assigned to receive a version that uses just one of the three different terms. The first experiment found that the framing effect of food technology as either GE or GM may be contingent on source of information. When the technology was framed as GE and the information source was a consumer organization, respondents reported higher perceived personal control over the technology compared to when the information source was government, newspaper, or no source. Therefore, framing food as GE may be a somewhat beneficial for those who seek to promote the technology while framing the technology as GM might help those who oppose the technology. The second experiment found that using the terms agbiotech and GE were associated with higher perceived benefits, positive feelings, and purchase intention compared to GM. The 'agbiotech' term garnered the most relative support for the technology. Implications are discussed.
机译：风险感知和通信文献似乎使用诸如基因工程（GE），遗传修改（GM）和农业生物技术（AGBIOTECH）的术语来互换。因此，目前的研究旨在比较这三个术语对消费者认知，情感和行为组成部分的态度的影响。调查下的变量是消费者对风险，福利，个人控制对技术，支持和促进技术，恐惧，标签和购买意图的风险，福利，个人控制的看法。该研究借鉴了在进行两个问题措辞实验中的等效框架文献，由此随机分配参与者以接收仅使用三种不同术语之一的版本。第一个实验发现，食品技术为GE或GM的框架效果可能在信息源上取决于信息。当该技术被诬陷为GE和信息来源是消费者组织时，与信息来源是政府，报纸或没有来源时，受访者报告了对技术的个人控制更高。因此，框架食品作为GE可能对那些寻求促进技术的人来说可能有点有益，因为通用汽车可能帮助那些反对该技术的人。第二种实验发现，与GM相比，使用Agbiotech和GE的术语与较高的感知益处，积极情绪和购买意向有关。 “agbiotech”的术语获得了对该技术的最相关的支持。讨论了含义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号