본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

유전자변형(GMO) 표시방법 프레이밍이 소비자의 위험지각과 구매의도에 미치는 영향

The Effect of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) Label Framing on Risk Perception and Purchase Intention

석관호|김영주
한국소비자학회 (Korean Society Of Consumer Studies)|2019.12|소비자학연구 (Journal of Consumer Studies)|제30권 제6호|pp. 171-194|DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.35736/JCS.30.6.8

2

조회

0

다운로드

2

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

지각된 위험framing프레이밍perceived riskfood labeling건강관여도유전자변형(GMO)식품식품 라벨 표시GMO (genetically modified organisms)health involvement
주제분류경제학

초록

본 연구는 GMO식품 표시방법이 GMO원료를 포함하는 GMO식품과 GMO원료를 사용하지 않은 일반식품 평가 에 미치는 영향을 고찰하였다. 동일한 식품이라도 GMO 표시방법에 따라 소비자에게 전달되는 원료에 대한 정보가 달라지며, 이는소비자가제품을평가하는데영향을미칠수있다. 본연구는식품원료를표시하는데있어서두 가지 프레임의 영향을 검증하였다. 속성존재 프레임(presence frame)이 사용되는 경우에는 GMO식품에는 “GMO” 라는 라벨이 표시되고, 일반식품에는 GMO와 관련된 정보가 제시되지 않는다. 반대로 속성부재 프레임(absence frame)이 사용되는 경우 일반식품에는 “Non-GMO”라는 표시가 사용되지만 GMO제품에는 관련 정보가 표시되지 않는다. 본 연구는 GMO표시방법이 소비자의 제품 평가에 미치는 영향에 대한 가설을 제시하고, 두 실험을 통해 이를 검증하였다. 실험 1의 결과는 동일한 GMO식품이라도 속성존재 (vs. 부재) 프레임의 경우에 지각된 위험과 구매의도가 더 부정적이라는 것을 보여주었다. 그러나 일반식품에서는 정보 표시방법의 효과가 나타나지 않았다. 실 험 2에서는 개인 특성 변수인 건강관여도(health motivation)의 조절 효과를 검증하였으며, GMO정보 제시방법 의 효과는 소비자의 건강관여도가 높을수록 강한 것으로 나타났다. 본 연구는 GMO원료 표시방법이 소비자의 제품 지각 및 구매의도에 미치는 영향을 검증했다는 점에서 소비자교육과 공공정책 결정에 시사점을 줄 것으로 기대된다.

Abstract

This research examines the effects of GMO (genetically modified organisms) food labeling on the evaluations of foods that either contain or do not contain GMO ingredients. Although there has been no conclusion about the debates on whether GMO foods are harmful to health, consumers tend to believe that GMO can potentially cause health problems. Therefore, consumers have negative attitudes towards GMO products that are perceived to be high in health risk. An important issue that is related to risk perception is how to communicate whether a food product contains GMO ingredients or not. Information about food ingredients are presented by food labels, and there are different methods to label GMO ingredients. The current research compares between two labeling methods for communicating GMO ingredients. An attribute “presence” frame presents GMO foods with “GMO” label and Non-GMO foods (that do not contain GM ingredients) without any related labels. On the other hand, an attribute “absence” frame presents Non-GMO foods with “Non-GMO” label and GMO foods without any labels. Therefore, the information that describes the same type of food differs depending on which frame is used to communicate GMO ingredients, which in turn can affect consumer evaluation of the GMO and Non-GMO foods. We test the influence of GMO labeling on perceived health risk of the food and purchase intention of the food. We expect the influence labeling on purchase intention is mediated by perceived risk. We hypothesize that purchase intentions of GMO and Non-GMO foods are affected by GMO label framing (H1), the influence of labeling on purchase intention is mediated by perceived health risk (H2), and the labeling effect is stronger for consumers with higher (vs. lower) level of health involvement (H3). H1 predicts that the influence of GMO labeling on purchase intention will differ for GMO foods and Non-GMO foods. Specifically, it is predicted that consumer evaluation of GMO foods is more negative for attribute presence frame than attribute-absence frame. Because negative product information tends to draw more consumer attention and have stronger influence on product evaluation (i.e., negativity bias), the “GMO” label of the presence-frame should decrease consumer preference for GMO foods. For Non-GMO foods, it is expected that the effects of GMO labeling on consumer evaluation is weaker than those for GMO foods. This prediction is based on the logic that the influence of positive (vs. negative) information on product perception and evaluation is weaker. In addition, because Non-GMO (vs. GMO) foods are more common, “Non-GMO” label is less diagnostic. H2 predicts that the influence of GMO labeling on purchase intention is mediated by perceived health risk of the food. H3 is about the moderating role of consumer health involvement. It is expected that the GMO labeling effect is stronger for consumer with higher (vs. lower) level of health involvement because they tend to pay more attention to and influenced more by food labels. The research hypotheses were tested in two experiments. Experiment 1 tested the influence of GMO labeling (i.e., attribute presence vs. absence) on consumer purchase intention of GMO and Non-GMO orange juice product. Perceived health risk was measured as potential mediator. The results supported our hypotheses. The attribute presence (vs. absence) frame increased perceived risk and decreased purchase intentions of the GMO food. However, the influence of GMO labeling on perceived risk and purchase intention was not significant for the Non-GMO food. Perceived health risk mediated the influence of labeling on purchase intention. Experiment 2 tested the moderation effect of health involvement in the effects of GMO labeling on purchase intention for GMO and Non-GMO Cajun nuts. The results show that the impact of GMO labeling on consumer purchase intention was moderated by consumer health involvement. That is, the effects of GMO information presentation method on purchase intention were stronger (weaker) when consumers' health involvement level is higher (lower). The findings of this research present implications for public policy and consumer education. Consumer perception and purchase of foods can be influenced by the law or regulations about GMO ingredients, which should be taken into consideration in public policy decisions. Another important implication is for consumer education. Consumer may be able to make a better decision by understating that their perception and purchase decision can be affected the way the food information is presented.

참고문헌 (51)

  1. 김문희, "식품의 영양강조표시가 소비자의 건강신념과 브랜드태도, 질병리스크지각에 미치는 영향", 소비자학연구, 21(3), pp.53~81 (2010), 한국소비자학회
  2. 박소진, "건강동기와 환경에 대한 관심이 유기농 식품 선택에 미치는 영향 연구", 소비문화연구, 10(4), pp.107~126 (2007), 한국소비문화학회[DOI]
  3. 송미령, "제품 라벨의 첨가물 표기 정보에 대한 소비자의 지각 연구: 첨가물 비중과 수에 대한 정보처리를 중심으로", 소비자학연구, 26(6), pp.47~76 (2015), 한국소비자학회
  4. 식품의약품안전처, "유전자 변형 제품 등의표시 기준", 국가법령정보센터, ~ (2019)
  5. 유현정, "소비자의 식품안전 체감 및 역량척도 개발 연구", 소비자학연구, 23(4), pp.79~104 (2012), 한국소비자학회
  6. 유현정, "식품안전에 대한 소비자체감도가 식품안전지향행동에 미치는 영향의 구조모형 분석", 소비자정책교육연구, 8(4), pp.49~70 (2012), 한국소비자정책교육학회
  7. 전상민, "건강관련 식품표시가 구매 전 품질평가와 제품 사용 및 구매태도, 구매의도에 미치는 영향: 계획적 행동이론을 바탕으로", 소비문화연구, 15(3), pp.67~90 (2012), 한국소비문화학회[DOI]
  8. 전상민, "가공식품 건강강조표시에 대한 소비자 평가 및 선호도 분석", 소비자정책교육연구, 4(2), pp.75~95 (2008)
  9. "Statement by the AAAS board of directors on labeling of genetically modified foods" (2012)[URL]
  10. Anand, Alok, "Consumer Response to Information and Second-Generation Genetically Modified Food in India", Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, 5(1), pp.1~18 (2007)
  11. André, Quentin, "Healthy Through Presence or Absence, Nature or Science? A Framework for Understanding Front-of-Package Food Claims", Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 38(2), pp.172~191 (2019)
  12. Baker, Gregory A., "Consumer Response to Genetically Modified Foods : Market Segment Analysis and Implications for Producers and Policy Makers", Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 26(2), pp.387~403 (2001)
  13. Baltas, George, "The Effects of Nutrition Information on Consumer Choice", Journal of Advertising Research, 41(2), pp.57~63 (2001)
  14. Baumeister, Roy F., "Bad Is Stronger than Good", Review of General Psychology, 5(4), pp.323~370 (2001)
  15. Bovay, John, "GMO Food Labels in the United States : Economic Implications of the New Law", Food Policy, 78, pp.14~25 (2018)
  16. Chern, Wen S., "Consumer Acceptance and Willingness to Pay for Genetically Modified Vegetable Oil and Salmon : A Multiple-Country Assessment", AgBioForum, 5(3), pp.105~112 (2002)
  17. Costanigro, Marco, "The Signaling Effect of Mandatory Labels on Genetically Engineered Food", Food Policy, 49, pp.259~267 (2014)
  18. Crespi, John M., "“Does Contain” vs. “Does Not Contain”:Does It Matter Which GMO Label Is Used?", European Journal of Law and Economics, 16(3), pp.327~344 (2003)
  19. Dannenberg, Astrid, "The Dispersion and Development of Consumer Preference for Genetically Modified Food – A Meta-Analysis", Ecological Economics, 68(8-9), pp.2182~2192 (2009)
  20. Dannenberg, Astrid, "Mandatory versus Voluntary Labelling of Genetically Modified Food : Evidence from an Economic Experiment", Agricultural Economics, 42(3), pp.373~386 (2011)
  21. Garretson, Judith A., "Effects of Nutrition Facts Panel Values, nutrition Claims, and Health Claims on Consumer Attitudes, Perceptions of Disease-Related Risks, and Trust", Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19(2), pp.213~227 (2000)
  22. Gaskell, George, "GM Foods and the Misperception of Risk Perception", Risk Analysis, 24(1), pp.185~194 (2004)
  23. Giannakas, Konstantinos, "Consumption Effects of Genetic Modification:What If Consumers Are Right?", Agricultural Economics, 27(2), pp.97~109 (2002)
  24. Hayes, Andrew F., "Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis:A Regression-Based Approach" (2018), Guilford
  25. He, Na, "Differences in WTP and Consumer Demand for Organic and Non-GM Fresh and Processed Foods", Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 40(2), pp.218~232 (2011)
  26. Hess, Sebastian, "Consumers’ Evaluation of Biotechnologically Modified Food Products: New Evidence from a Meta-Survey", European Review of Agricultural Economics, 43(5), pp.703~736 (2016)
  27. Hossain, Ferdaus, "Product Attributes and Consumer Acceptance of Nutritionally Enhanced Genetically Modified Foods", International Journal of Consumer Studies, 28(3), pp.255~267 (2004)
  28. Hu, Wuyang, "Labelling Genetically Modified Food : Heterogeneous Consumer Preferences and the Value of Information", Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 53(1), pp.83~102 (2005)
  29. Kim, Renee B., "Consumer Attitude of Risk and Benefits toward Genetically Modified (GM) Foods in South Korea: Implications for Food Policy", Engineering Economics, 23(2), pp.189~199 (2012)
  30. Kimenju, Simon Chege, "Consumer Willingness to Pay for Genetically Modified Food in Kenya", Agricultural Economics, 38(1), pp.35~46 (2008)
  31. Liaukonyte, Jura, "Consumer Response to “Contains” and “Free of” Labeling: Evidence from Lab Experiments", Applied Economic Perspective and Policy, 35(3), pp.476~507 (2013)
  32. Loureiro, "Discovering Niche Markets: A Comparison of Consumer Willingness to Pay for Local (Colorado Grown), Organic, and GMO-Free Products", Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 34(3), pp.477~487 (2002)
  33. Lusk, Jayson L., "A Meta Analysis of Genetically Modified Food Valuation Studies", Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 30(1), pp.28~44 (2005)
  34. Lusk, Jayson L., "Public Policy and Endogenous Beliefs: The Case of Genetically Modified Food", Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 33(2), pp.270~289 (2008)
  35. Mitchell, Vincent-Wayne, "Consumer Perceived Risk: Conceptualizations and Models", European Journal of Marketing, 33(1, pp.2) (1999), 163~195
  36. Moon, Wanki, "Public Perceptions and Willingness-to-Pay a Premium for Non-GMO Foods in the US and UK", AgBioForum, 4(3&4), pp.221~231 (2001)
  37. Moon, Wanki, "Public Attitudes toward Agrobiotechnology:The Mediating Role of Risk Perceptions on the Impact of Trust, Awareness, and Outrage", Applied Economic Perspective and Policy, 26(2), pp.186~208 (2004)
  38. Moorman, Christine, "The Effects of Stimulus and Consumer Characteristics on the utilization of Nutrition Information", Journal of Consumer Research, 17(3), pp.362~374 (1990)
  39. Moorman, Christine, "A Model of Consumers’ Preventive Health Behaviors : The Role of Health Motivation and Health Ability", Journal of Consumer Research, 20(2), pp.208~228 (1993)
  40. Prada, Maríla, "The Impact of a Gluten-Free Claim on the Perceived Healthfulness, Calories, Level of Processing and Expected Taste of Food Products", Food Quality and Preference, 73, pp.284~287 (2019)
  41. Rousu, Matthew, "Effects and Value of Verifiable Information in a Controversial Market : Evidence from Lab Auctions of Genetically Modified Food", Economic Inquiry, 45(3), pp.409~432 (2007)
  42. Rousu, Matthew C., "Valuing Information on GM Foods in a WTA Market: What Information Is Most Valuable?", AgBioForum, 12(2), pp.226~231 (2009)
  43. Schouteten, Joachim, "Consumers’ Perceptions of GM-Free Labeled Foods : A Sensory Experiment", International Journal of Consumer Studies, 42(3), pp.347~357 (2017)
  44. Siegrist, Michael, "The Influence of Trust and Perceptions of Risks and Benefits on the Acceptance of Gene Technology", Risk Analysis, 20(2), pp.195~203 (2000)
  45. Spiller, Stephen A., "Spotlights, Floodlights, and the Magic Number Zero : Simple Effects Tests in Moderated Regression", Journal of Marketing Research, 50(2), pp.277~288 (2013)
  46. Wachenheim, Cheryl, "Willingness to Pay for Genetically Modified Foods Under Differing Information Scenarios", Journal of Food Product Marketing, 13(4), pp.57~77 (2007)
  47. Wansink, Brian, "Can “Low-Fat” Nutrition Labels Lead to Obesity?", Journal of Marketing Research, 43(4), pp.605~617 (2006)
  48. World Health Organization, "Frequently Asked Questions on Genetically Modified Foods", World Health Organization, ~ (2014)
  49. Yamagishi, Kimihiko, "When a 12.86%Mortality Is More Dangerous than 24.14%:Implications for Risk Communication", Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11(6), pp.495~506 (1997)
  50. Zhao, Xinshu, "Reconsidering Baron and Kenny:Myths and Truths about Mediation Analysis", Journal of Marketing Research, 37(2), pp.197~206 (2010)
  51. Zilberman, David, "The Political Economy of Labeling", Food Policy, 78, pp.6~13 (2018)

관련 논문AI추천

GMO 정보 전달 방식이 소비자의 가치 인식에 미치는 영향양성범, 유병덕, 이수린한국유기농업학회 · 한국유기농업학회지2023 · 제31권 제4호GM Foods에 대한 소비자 지식과 소비자 인식 및 구매의도김경자한국소비자원 · 소비자문제연구2010 · 제38호미국 소비자의 GM식품(Genetically Modified Foods) 구입 의향한재환한국농촌경제연구원 · 농촌경제2008 · 제31권 제3호유전자 변형식품에 대한 고객인식과 구매의도 관계에서 지각위험 조절효과 분석권기완, 우성근, 유영애한국호텔리조트학회 · 호텔리조트연구2014 · 제13권 제2호유전자재조합식품에 대한 정보제공 전과 후의 소비자 인식 변화에 대한 연구김형일, 이은자한국호텔리조트학회 · 호텔리조트연구2021 · 제20권 제6호식품위험에 대한 소비자친화적 위험 커뮤니케이션 소구 방안 연구: 낙인해소와 주의촉구의 측면에서사지연, 여정성한국소비자정책교육학회 · 소비자정책교육연구2020 · 제16권 제4호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (10건)

가격과 품질의 손실회피 비대칭성이 가격순서효과에 미치는 영향석관호, 이지헌pp. 1-19의료 서비스의 실패 상황에서 서비스 회복 보상과 진정성이 서비스 이용 행동에 미치는 영향한상린, 강민정, 백미영pp. 21-50심리적 환경요인이 전기차 수용에 미치는 영향: 확장된 계획행동이론의 적용문선정pp. 51-731인 미디어의 공신력 판단기준에 대한 세부요소 분석: 뷰티유튜버를 중심으로양미현, 이혜린, 최지희, 김다은, 장수연pp. 75-95불균형 데이터 환경에서 가계부채 상환연체 분류를 위한 머신러닝의 활용이종희pp. 97-118
원문 보기