Files
Abstract
Abstract This study explores information framing effects by comparing the effectiveness of using logical-scientific vs. narrative information to communicate about food biotechnology to consumers. An online survey was conducted in the summer of 2016 with 804 Canadian adults. Data were collected on attitudes towards food biotechnology and food choice behaviours. In particular, a choice experiment was included in the online survey to elicit preferences for diverse novel food attributes and technologies. Each respondent was randomly assigned to an information condition. 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. 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. Keywords: Biotechnology Communication, Choice Experiment, Information Framing Effect, Narratives
Acknowledgement : The authors would like to acknowledge the assistance of the Social Sciences Research Laboratories (SSRL) at the University of Saskatchewan in collecting the data. Funding support from AFBI (Alliance for Food and Bioproducts Innovation) Scholars Program, Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture is also acknowledged.