Linking behaviour to food safety risk. Professor Lynn J. Frewer. Food and Society Group

Transcription

1 Linking behaviour to food safety risk Professor Lynn J. Frewer Food and Society Group

2 Problem from a natural science perspective Farm Food Processing Retail Consumer consumption

3 Problem from a social science perspective Information Information Processing Perceived risk Consumer Consumption

4 Problem alignment Farm Information Food Processing Retail Information Processing Perceived risk Consumer Consumption

5 How do people process food risk information? How does this change their behaviours? (If at all?) How can we improve food safety practices?

6 Optimistic bias Where people think they are, on average, at less risk than a comparative individual in their society As a consequence, they tend to engage in risky behaviours Does this apply to food safety? YES! Miles, S., & Scaife, V. (2003). Optimistic bias and food. Nutrition Research Reviews, 16(01), 3-19.

7 Risk ratings Alcohol Fat Food poisoning (home) Food poisoning (outside) Microwave ovens Irradiation Pesticides GM animal GM micro-organisms GM plants society other people personal Frewer, L. J., Shepherd, R., & Sparks, P. (1994). The interrelationship between perceived knowledge, control and risk associated with a range of food related hazards targeted at the ndividual, other people and society. Journal of food safety, 14(1),

8 Control ratings Alcohol Fat Food poisoning (home) Food poisoning (outside) Microwave ovens Irradiation Pesticides GM animal GM micro-organisms GM plants society other people personal Frewer, Shepherd & Sparks (1994)

9 Knowledge ratings Alcohol Fat Food poisoning (home) Food poisoning (outside) Microwave ovens Irradiation Pesticides GM animal GM micro-organisms GM plants society other people personal Frewer, Shepherd & Sparks (1994)

10 Risk communication If people think risk communication is directed towards People who are at greater risk People who have less control about the risk People who are less knowledgeable....why should they change their behaviours in line with the risk communication messages?

11 Assessing perceptions of food risks FAMILIAR Wave 1 Salmonella Saturated Fats Sugar C Botulinum NOT DREADED DREADED Organic Produce Colouring Nitrates BSE Pesticide Residue Hormone Residue Genetically Altered Foods UNFAMILIAR Fife-Schaw, C., & Rowe, G. (2000). Extending the application of the psychometric approach for assessing public perceptions of food risk: some methodological considerations. Journal of Risk Research, 3(2),

12 Risk Communication Issues What information should be communicated (What are people doing wrong) Are some people more vulnerable than others? (> Targeted communication) How to overcome optimistic bias? (It won t happen to me!) How to get people to process information in an in depth way which influences self-protective behaviours?

13 Explaining individual differences What psychological factors determine consumer attitudes, decision-making and impact on self-protective behaviors?

14 Clusters of Consumers and self protective behaviour Rasch Score I: Traditional family II: Average Family (traditional) III: Average Family IV: Average Family (modern) domestic food safety Less educated older w omen, few est jobs, habitual cooks, optimistic about ow n cooking, ; 0.78; 7% Not Single, Older, high external locus of control, Habitual cooks, Optimistic; 0.56; 21% Female medium age cooks ; 0.37; 35% Average families ; 0.16; 28% Results of hierarchical cluster analysis on Rasch data V: Single Male Highly educated single male, City residence, Long w orking hours, No habitual cook, low external locus of control; ; 9% Fischer, A. R., Frewer, L. J., & Nauta, M. J. (2006). Toward Improving Food Safety in the Domestic Environment: A Multi Item Rasch Scale for the Measurement of the Safety Efficacy of Domestic Food Handling Practices. Risk Analysis, 26(5),

15 Targeting individual information needs Focus on achievable objectives regarding interventions for different population groups Identify which consumer is at risk, and give him/her information that (s)he needs Rasch scale provides information to determine which behaviour is within reach for which consumer Test against microbiological risks associated with specific food preparation behaviours

16 Determinants of consumer behaviour Social science Natural science Fischer, A. R., & Frewer, L. J. (2008). Food Safety Practices in the Domestic Kitchen: Demographic, Personality, and Experiential Determinants1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(11),

17 A hierarchical view - subjective representation of food safety Level 3 Food Behaviour Level 2 Nutrition Food Safety χ 2 =1116; df=248; RMSEA=0.065 CFI=0.93; GFI=0.90; CAIC=1517 (independence CAIC=11154; saturated CAIC=2314) Level 1 Calorie Content Dietary Variation Utensil Hygiene Personal Hygiene Food Handling Fischer and Frewer, submitted Item 23 Item 24 Item 19 Item 20 Item 21 Item 22 Item 01 Item 02 Item 03 Item 04 Item 05 Item 06 Item 07 Item 08 Item 09 Item 10 Item 11 Item 12 Item 13 Item 14 Item 15 Item 16 Item 17 Item 18

18 Determinants of food safety and good nutrition? Developing communication interventions. Habitual behaviour People tend to do what they have always done, despite having other knowledge about how to protect themselves Perceived Risk versus perceived benefit Peoples decisions involve trading-off their perceptions of risk associated with engaging in a behaviour versus their perceptions of benefit. Role of affect or emotion Emotional cues may trigger knowledge and/or attitude activation which translates into behaviour Implicit memory People may not explicitly recollect their knowledge? Interactions between these.

19 Individual Differences in Seeking Food Safety Information Low trait worry and health locus of control Male, less well educated Low health locus of control Low confidence in information Male, highly educated, no child care responsibility average 24% users heavy nonusers 23% 13% heavy 20% users formal source 20% users Active information seekers Confident in sources Female, with young children social source users Use social networks and retailers for information High trait worry Younger, female, low education Confident about scientific and government sources High health locus of control Highly educated Kornelis, M., De Jonge, J., Frewer, L., & Dagevos, H. (2007). Consumer Selection of Food Safety Information Sources. Risk Analysis, 27(2),

20 The role of attitude activation

21 Activating knowledge Use images to evoke relevant emotion? Disgust activates food safety knowledge Anger does not activate food safety knowledge Van Asselt, E., Fischer, A., De Jong, A. E., Nauta, M. J., & De Jonge, R. (2009). Cooking practices in the kitchen Observed versus predicted behavior. Risk analysis, 29(4),

22 Embed Food safety messages in recipes? Embed Food Safety messages in recipes? Reduce optimistic bias by equating information with target group?

23 So where are we? We know a lot about barriers to behavioural change related to food safety How do we overcome these?

24 Thank you! Questions or comments? What NEW research is needed to make consumers safe?