create a website

Cultured Meat – From Scientific Challenge to Consumer Acceptance as Sustainable Food Source. (2024). Negrea, Teodor Mihai ; Dina, Razvan ; Voinea, Lelia ; Popescu, Dorin Vicentiu.
In: The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal.
RePEc:aes:amfeco:v:26:y:2024:i:65:p:346.

Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

Cited: 0

Citations received by this document

Cites: 62

References cited by this document

Cocites: 50

Documents which have cited the same bibliography

Coauthors: 0

Authors who have wrote about the same topic

Citations

Citations received by this document

    This document has not been cited yet.

References

References cited by this document

  1. ‘Would you eat cultured meat?’: Consumers’ reactions and attitude formation in Belgium, Portugal and the United Kingdom. Meat Science, [e-journal] 102, pp. 49-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.11.013.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  2. [online] Delft: CE Delft. Available at: <https://cedelft.eu/publications/rapport-lca-ofcultivated -meat-future-projections-for-different-scenarios/> [Accessed 14 March 2023].
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  3. AE Cultured Meat – From Scientific Challenge to Consumer Acceptance as Sustainable Food Source 360 Amfiteatru Economic Frewer, L.J., Howard, C. and Shepherd, R., 1995. Genetic engineering and food: what determines consumer acceptance? British Food Journal, [e-journal] 97(8), pp. 31-36. https://doi.org/10.1108/00070709510100118.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  4. AE Cultured Meat – From Scientific Challenge to Consumer Acceptance as Sustainable Food Source 362 Amfiteatru Economic Siegrist, M., Sütterlin, B. and Hartmann, C., 2018. Perceived naturalness and evoked disgust influence acceptance of cultured meat. Meat Science, [e-journal] 139, pp. 213-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.02.007.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  5. Alexander, P., Brown, C., Arneth, A., Dias, C., Finnigan, J., Moran, D. and Rounsevell, M.D.A., 2017. Could consumption of insects, cultured meat or imitation meat reduce global agricultural land use? Global Food Security, [e-journal] 15, pp. 22-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2017.04.001.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  6. Alhakami, A.S. and Slovic, P., 1994. A Psychological Study of the Inverse Relationship Between Perceived Risk and Perceived Benefit. Risk Analysis, [e-journal] 14(6), pp. 1085-1096. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00080.x. Allievi, F., Vinnari, M. and Luukkanen, J., 2015. Meat consumption and production – analysis of efficiency, sufficiency and consistency of global trends. Journal of Cleaner Production, [e-journal] 92, pp. 142-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.12.075.

  7. Amfiteatru Economic recommends AE Vol. 26 • No. 65 • February 2024 359 Bord, R.J. and O’Connor, R.E., 1990. Risk Communication, Knowledge, and Attitudes: Explaining Reactions to a Technology Perceived as Risky. Risk Analysis, [e-journal] 10(4), pp. 499-506. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1990.tb00535.x. Bruhn, C.M., 1998. Consumer acceptance of irradiated food: theory and reality. Radiation Physics and Chemistry, [e-journal] 52(1-6), pp. 129-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0969806X (98)00088-7.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  8. Amfiteatru Economic recommends AE Vol. 26 • No. 65 • February 2024 361 Oliveira, I.B. and Sabato, S.F., 2004. Dissemination of the food irradiation process on different opportunities in Brazil. Radiation Physics and Chemistry, [e-journal] 71(1-2), pp. 495-499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2004.03.081.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  9. Austgulen, M., Skuland, S., Schjøll, A. and Alfnes, F., 2018. Consumer Readiness to Reduce Meat Consumption for the Purpose of Environmental Sustainability: Insights from Norway. Sustainability, [e-journal] 10(9), article no. 3058. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su10093058.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  10. Bastian, B. and Loughnan, S., 2017. Resolving the Meat-Paradox: A Motivational Account of Morally Troublesome Behavior and Its Maintenance. Personality and Social Psychology Review, [e-journal] 21(3), pp. 278-299. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1088868316647562.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  11. Bearth, A. and Siegrist, M., 2019. “As long as it is not irradiated” – Influencing factors of US consumers’ acceptance of food irradiation. Food Quality and Preference, [e-journal] 71, pp. 141-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.06.015.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  12. Behrens, J.H., Barcellos, M.N., Frewer, L.J., Nunes, T.P. and Landgraf, M., 2009. Brazilian consumer views on food irradiation. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies, [e-journal] 10(3), pp. 383-389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2009.01.001.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  13. Ben-Arye, T. and Levenberg, S., 2019. Tissue Engineering for Clean Meat Production.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  14. Besley, J., 2010. Current research on public perceptions of nanotechnology. Emerging Health Threats Journal, [e-journal] 3, article no. e8. https://doi.org/10.3134/ehtj.10.164.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  15. Bobe, M., Procopie, R. and Bucur, M., 2019. Exploring the Role of Individual Food Security in the Assessment of Population’s Food Safety. Amfiteatru Economic, [e-journal] 21(51), pp. 347-360. https://doi.org/10.24818/EA/2019/51/347.

  16. Bringing cultured meat to market: Technical, socio-political, and regulatory challenges in cellular agriculture. Trends in Food Science & Technology, [e-journal] 78, pp. 155-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2018.04.010.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  17. Bryant, C. and Barnett, J., 2020. Consumer Acceptance of Cultured Meat: An Updated Review (2018-2020). Applied Sciences, [e-journal] 10(15), article no. 5201. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10155201.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  18. Chaudhry, L. Castle and R. Watkins eds., 2017. Nanotechnologies in food. Nanoscience & Nanotechnology series, 2nd ed. London, UK: Royal Society of Chemistry, pp. 39-59.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  19. Chriki, S. and Hocquette, J.-F., 2020. The Myth of Cultured Meat: A Review. Frontiers in Nutrition, [e-journal] 7, article no. 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2020.00007.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  20. Consumer attitudes towards nanotechnologies applied to food production. Trends in Food Science & Technology, [e-journal] 40(2), pp. 211-225. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.tifs.2014.06.005.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  21. Costa-Font, M. and Gil, J.M., 2009. Structural equation modelling of consumer acceptance of genetically modified (GM) food in the Mediterranean Europe: A cross country study.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  22. Costa-Font, M., Gil, J.M. and Traill, W.B., 2008. Consumer acceptance, valuation of and attitudes towards genetically modified food: Review and implications for food policy.

  23. De Graaf, M., 2019. Poor diet kills more than smoking and hypertension: More than 500,000 Americans and 90,000 Brits a year die from too much meat and too few veggies, Bill Gates study reveals. Dailymail. [online] 3 April. Available at: <https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-6881937/Poor-diet-kills-smokinghypertension -Bill-Gates-study-reveals.html> [Accessed 25 August 2019].
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  24. Dziopa, F. and Ahern, K., 2011. A Systematic Literature Review of the Applications of QTechnique and Its Methodology. Methodology, [e-journal] 7(2), pp. 39-55. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/a000021.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  25. EIT Food Trust Report, 2021. Sustainable food choices and the role of trust in the food chain. The EIT Food Trust Report. [online] Available at: <https://www.eitfood.eu/ media/news-pdf/EIT_Food_Trust_Report_2021.pdf> [Accessed 5 December 2022].
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  26. Fischer, A.R.H. and Reinders, M.J., 2022. Consumer acceptance of novel foods. In: C.M. Galanakis ed., 2022. Innovation Strategies in the Food Industry. 2nd ed. s.l.: Academic Press, pp. 307-333. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-85203-6.00013-X.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  27. Food Technology Magazine, [online] Available at: <https://www.ift.org/news-andpublications /food-technology-magazine/issues/2002/october/features/consumeracceptance -of-genetically-modified-foods> [Accessed 5 November 2018].
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  28. Frewer, L.J. and Miles, S., 2003. Temporal stability of the psychological determinants of trust: implications for communications about food risks. Health, Risk and Society, [e-journal] 5(3), pp. 259-271. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698570310001606969.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  29. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, [e-journal] 3(46). https://doi.org/10.3389/ fsufs.2019.00046.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  30. Gupta, N., Frewer, L.J. and Fischer, A.R.H., 2017. Acceptance of Agri-Food Nanotechnology: Insights from the Evolution of Food Technology, Novel Foods and the Psychology of Novel Food Acceptance and Evidence from Present Research. In: Q.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  31. Hoban, T.J., 1997. Consumer acceptance of biotechnology: An international perspective.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  32. House, L., Lusk, J.L., Jaeger, S., Traill, W.B., Moore, M., Valli, C., Morrow, B. and Yee, W.M.S., 2004. Objective And Subjective Knowledge: Impacts On Consumer Demand For Genetically Modified Foods In The United States And The European Union. [online] Available at: <https://doi.org/10.22004/AG.ECON.20125> [Accessed 20 August 2023].

  33. Increasing public understanding of transgenic crops through the World Wide Web. Public Understanding of Science, [e-journal] 11(3), pp. 293-304. https://doi.org/10.1088/09636625 /11/3/306.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  34. Khan, K.S., Kunz, R., Kleijnen, J. and Antes, G., 2003. Five Steps to Conducting a Systematic Review. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, [e-journal] 96(3), pp. 118-121. https://doi.org/10.1177/014107680309600304.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  35. Laestadius, L.I., 2015. Public Perceptions of the Ethics of In-vitro Meat: Determining an Appropriate Course of Action. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, [e-journal] 28(5), pp. 991-1009. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-015-9573-8.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  36. Lensvelt, E.J.S. and Steenbekkers, L.P.A., 2014. Exploring Consumer Acceptance of Entomophagy: A Survey and Experiment in Australia and the Netherlands. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, [e-journal] 53(5), pp. 543-561. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 03670244.2013.879865.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  37. Lusk, J.L. and Sullivan, P., 2002. Consumer Acceptance of Genetically Modified Foods.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  38. Munteanu, C., Mireşan, V., Răducu, C., Ihuţ, A., Uiuiu, P., Pop, D., Neacşu, A., Cenariu, M. and Groza, I., 2021. Can Cultured Meat Be an Alternative to Farm Animal Production for a Sustainable and Healthier Lifestyle? Frontiers in Nutrition, [e-journal] 8, article no. 749298. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2021.749298.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  39. Padulo, C., Carlucci, L., Balsamo, M. and Fairfield, B., 2022. A dynamic hop to cricket consumption: factors influencing willingness to try insect-based food. Journal of Insects as Food and Feed, [e-journal] 8(10), pp. 1157-1168. https://doi.org/10.3920/ JIFF2021.0112.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  40. Piazza, J., Ruby, M.B., Loughnan, S., Luong, M., Kulik, J., Watkins, H.M. and Seigerman, M., 2015. Rationalizing meat consumption. The 4Ns. Appetite, [e-journal] 91, pp. 114-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.04.011.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  41. Pieniak, Z., Żakowska-Biemans, S., Kostyra, E. and Raats, M., 2016. Sustainable healthy eating behaviour of young adults: towards a novel methodological approach. BMC Public Health, [e-journal] 16(1), article no. 577. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3260-1.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  42. Post, M.J., 2012. Cultured meat from stem cells: Challenges and prospects. Meat Science, [e-journal] 92(3), pp. 297-301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.04.008.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  43. Purcărea, T.V., Orzan, G., Orzan, M. and Stoica, I., 2013. Romanian Consumer Behavior Regarding Traditional Foods: Contributing to the Rebuilding of a Healthier Food Culture.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  44. Rembischevski, P. and Caldas, E.D., 2020. Risk perception related to food. Food Science and Technology, [e-journal] 40(4), pp. 779-785. https://doi.org/10.1590/fst.28219.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  45. Rolland, N.C.M., Markus, C.R. and Post, M.J., 2020. The effect of information content on acceptance of cultured meat in a tasting context. PLOS ONE, [e-journal] 15(4), article no. e0231176. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0231176.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  46. Román, S., Sánchez-Siles, L.M. and Siegrist, M., 2017. The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review. Trends in Food Science & Technology, [e-journal] 67, pp. 44-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2017.06.010.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  47. Ruby, M.B., Rozin, P. and Chan, C., 2015. Determinants of willingness to eat insects in the USA and India. Journal of Insects as Food and Feed, [e-journal] 1(3), pp. 215-225. https://doi.org/10.3920/JIFF2015.0029.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  48. Saba, A. and Messina, F., 2003. Attitudes towards organic foods and risk/benefit perception associated with pesticides. Food Quality and Preference, [e-journal] 14(8), pp. 637-645.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  49. Shepherd, R., 2008. Involving the public and stakeholders in the evaluation of food risks.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  50. Siegrist, M. and Hartmann, C., 2020. Consumer acceptance of novel food technologies.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  51. Siegrist, M., 2007. Consumer attitudes to food innovation and technology. In: L. Frewer and H. van Trijp eds., 2007. Understanding Consumers of Food Products. s.l.: Woodhead Publishing, pp. 236-253. https://doi.org/10.1533/9781845692506.2.236.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  52. Siegrist, M., Gutscher, H. and Earle, T.C., 2005. Perception of risk: the influence of general trust, and general confidence. Journal of Risk Research, [e-journal] 8(2), pp. 145-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/1366987032000105315.

  53. Sinke, P., Odegard, I., van der Giesen, C., Swartz, E. and Sanctorum, H., 2023. Ex‑ ante life cycle assessment of commercial – scale cultivated meat production in 2030. Food Chains.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  54. Socaciu, M.-I., Câmpian, V., Dabija, D.-C., Fogarasi, M., Semeniuc, C.A., Podar, A.S. and Vodnar, D.C., 2022. Assessing Consumers’ Preference and Loyalty towards Biopolymer Films for Food Active Packaging. Coatings, [e-journal] 12(11), article no. 1770. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings12111770.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

  55. Stampfli, N., Siegrist, M. and Kastenholz, H., 2010. Acceptance of nanotechnology in food and food packaging: a path model analysis. Journal of Risk Research, [e-journal] 13(3), pp. 353-365. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669870903233303.

  56. Tenbült, P., de Vries, N.K., Dreezens, E. and Martijn, C., 2005. Perceived naturalness and acceptance of genetically modified food. Appetite, [e-journal] 45(1), pp. 47-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2005.03.004.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  57. Trends in Food Science & Technology, [e-journal] 19(5), pp. 234-239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2007.12.005.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  58. Voinea, L., Popescu, D.V., Bucur, M., Negrea, T.M., Dina, R. and Enache, C., 2020a. Reshaping the Traditional Pattern of Food Consumption in Romania through the Integration of Sustainable Diet Principles. A Qualitative Study. Sustainability, [e-journal] 12(14), article no. 5826. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12145826.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  59. Woolf, E., Maya, C., Yoon, J., Shertukde, S., Toia, T., Zhao, J., Zhu, Y., Peter, P.C. and Liu, C., 2021. Information and taste interventions for improving consumer acceptance of edible insects: a pilot study. Journal of Insects as Food and Feed, [e-journal] 7(2), pp. 129-139. https://doi.org/10.3920/JIFF2020.0057.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  60. Wu, W., Zhang, A., van Klinken, R.D., Schrobback, P. and Muller, J.M., 2021. Consumer Trust in Food and the Food System: A Critical Review. Foods, [e-journal] 10(10), article no. 2490. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10102490.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  61. Wunderlich, S. and Gatto, K.A., 2015. Consumer Perception of Genetically Modified Organisms and Sources of Information. Advances in Nutrition, [e-journal] 6(6), pp. 842-851. https://doi.org/10.3945/an.115.008870.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now
  62. Xiao, Y. and Watson, M., 2019. Guidance on Conducting a Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Planning Education and Research, [e-journal] 39(1), pp. 93-112.
    Paper not yet in RePEc: Add citation now

Cocites

Documents in RePEc which have cited the same bibliography

  1. Facilitating Electric Vehicle Adoption with Vehicle Cost Calculators. (2020). Alston-Stepnitz, Eli ; Cimene, Angelika ; Sanguinetti, Angela.
    In: Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series.
    RePEc:cdl:itsdav:qt368290kp.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  2. Pill or bill? Influence of monetary incentives on the perceived riskiness and the ethical approval of clinical trials. (2019). Hoffart, Janine ; Scheibehenne, Benjamin.
    In: Judgment and Decision Making.
    RePEc:jdm:journl:v:14:y:2019:i:2:p:130-134.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  3. Searching for New Directions for Energy Policy: Testing the Cross-Effect of Risk Perception and Cyberspace Factors on Online/Offline Opposition to Nuclear Energy in South Korea. (2019). Kim, Seoyong ; Wang, Jaesun.
    In: Sustainability.
    RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:5:p:1368-:d:211184.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  4. The effect of population age on the acceptable safety of self-driving vehicles. (2019). He, Zhen ; Zhang, Yawen ; Liu, Peng.
    In: Reliability Engineering and System Safety.
    RePEc:eee:reensy:v:185:y:2019:i:c:p:341-347.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  5. Investigating the influential factors of return channel loyalty in omni-channel retailing. (2019). Xu, Xun ; Jackson, Jonathan E.
    In: International Journal of Production Economics.
    RePEc:eee:proeco:v:216:y:2019:i:c:p:118-132.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  6. Biases and influencing factors in risk perception. (2019). Andrei, Virginia.
    In: Journal of Community Positive Practices.
    RePEc:cta:jcppxx:1192.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  7. What Predicts Government Trustworthiness in Cross-border HK-Guangdong Nuclear Safety Emergency Governance?. (2019). Gou, Z ; Han, Y ; Guo, P ; Lam, J.
    In: Cambridge Working Papers in Economics.
    RePEc:cam:camdae:1989.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  8. Tax or green nudge? An experimental analysis of pesticide policies in Germany. (2018). Musshoff, Oliver ; Buchholz, Matthias ; Peth, Denise.
    In: DARE Discussion Papers.
    RePEc:zbw:daredp:1813.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  9. Assessing the Effects of Information About Global Population Growth on Risk Perceptions and Support for Mitigation and Prevention Strategies. (2018). , Ian.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:38:y:2018:i:10:p:2222-2241.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  10. The role of value in the social acceptance of science-technology. (2015). Kim, Sun Hee.
    In: International Review of Public Administration.
    RePEc:taf:rrpaxx:v:20:y:2015:i:3:p:305-322.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  11. Paul Slovic: Risk Perceptions and Affect. (2014). Greenberg, Michael ; Lowrie, Karen.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:34:y:2014:i:2:p:206-209.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  12. When Can Scientific Studies Promote Consensus Among Conflicting Stakeholders?. (2014). Gven, Mit ; Small, Mitchell J ; Dekay, Michael L.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:34:y:2014:i:11:p:1978-1994.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  13. Values, Perceived Risks and Benefits, and Acceptability of Nuclear Energy. (2013). Poortinga, Wouter ; Steg, Linda.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:33:y:2013:i:2:p:307-317.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  14. Risks Perception of Electromagnetic Fields in Taiwan: The Influence of Psychopathology and the Degree of Sensitivity to Electromagnetic Fields. (2013). Lin, Yia Ping ; Cheng, Tsuna Jen ; Meg, Meia Chih ; Hu, Fua Chang.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:33:y:2013:i:11:p:2002-2012.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  15. When Precaution Creates Misunderstandings: The Unintended Effects of Precautionary Information on Perceived Risks, the EMF Case. (2013). Gutteling, Jan M ; Schuetz, Holger ; Boerner, Franziska ; da Silva, Flavia N ; Kikkawa, Toshiko ; de Villiers, Barney ; Croft, Rodney ; Kemp, Ray ; Shukla, Rajesh ; Wiedemann, Peter M ; Clauberg, Martin ; Barnett, Julie.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:33:y:2013:i:10:p:1788-1801.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  16. Attitude gaps between conventional plant breeding crops and genetically modified crops, and psychological models determining the acceptance of the two crops. (2013). Tanaka, Yutaka.
    In: Journal of Risk Research.
    RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:16:y:2013:i:1:p:69-80.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  17. Risk Communication, Public Engagement, and Climate Change: A Role for Emotions. (2012). Roeser, Sabine.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:32:y:2012:i:6:p:1033-1040.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  18. Ten Most Important Accomplishments in Risk Analysis, 1980–2010. (2012). Greenberg, Michael ; McComas, Katherine ; Lowrie, Karen ; Haas, Charles ; Cox, Anthony ; North, Warner.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:32:y:2012:i:5:p:771-781.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  19. Flu, Risks, and Videotape: Escalating Fear and Avoidance. (2012). John, Richard S ; Rosoff, Heather ; Prager, Fynnwin.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:32:y:2012:i:4:p:729-743.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  20. Expert relevance and the use of context-driven heuristic processes in risk perception. (2012). Fleming, Piers ; van Hilten, Joost A. ; Townsend, Ellen ; Ferguson, Eamonn ; Spence, Alexa.
    In: Journal of Risk Research.
    RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:15:y:2012:i:7:p:857-873.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  21. Waterborne Disease‐Related Risk Perceptions in the Sonora River Basin, Mexico. (2011). Halvorsen, Kathleen E ; Mayer, Alex S ; Morua, Agustin Robles.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:31:y:2011:i:5:p:866-878.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  22. Determinants and Mapping of Collective Perceptions of Technological Risk: The Case of the Second Nuclear Power Plant in Taiwan. (2011). Wang, Tzua Wen ; Hung, Hunga Chih.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:31:y:2011:i:4:p:668-683.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  23. A Cross‐Cultural Study of Perceived Benefit Versus Risk as Mediators in the Trust‐Acceptance Relationship. (2011). Bronfman, Nicols C ; Vzquez, Esperanza Lpez.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:31:y:2011:i:12:p:1919-1934.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  24. Examining the Relationship Between Affect and Implicit Associations: Implications for Risk Perception. (2010). Dohle, Simone ; Siegrist, Michael ; Keller, Carmen.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:30:y:2010:i:7:p:1116-1128.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  25. Risk and Benefit Perceptions of Mobile Phone and Base Station Technology in Bangladesh. (2010). Khan, Moin ; Frewer, Lynn J ; van Kleef, Ellen.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:30:y:2010:i:6:p:1002-1015.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  26. Communicating Risks: Examining Hazard and Outrage in Multiple Contexts. (2010). Spence, Patric R ; Lachlan, Kenneth.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:30:y:2010:i:12:p:1872-1886.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  27. Communicating Risks and Benefits from Fish Consumption: Impact on Belgian Consumers Perception and Intention to Eat Fish. (2008). Verbeke, Wim ; de Henauw, Stefaan ; Frewer, Lynn J ; van Camp, John ; Sioen, Isabelle ; Vanhonacker, Filiep.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:28:y:2008:i:4:p:951-967.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  28. The role of negative associations and trust in risk perception of new hydrogen systems. (2008). Fiona N. H. Montijn-Dorgelo, ; Cees J. H. Midden, .
    In: Journal of Risk Research.
    RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:11:y:2008:i:5:p:659-671.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  29. Intervening Effects of Knowledge, Morality, Trust, and Benefits on Support for Animal and Plant Biotechnology Applications. (2007). Knight, Andrew.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:27:y:2007:i:6:p:1553-1563.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  30. Cognitive and Emotional Representations of Terror Attacks: A Cross‐Cultural Exploration. (2007). Shiloh, Shoshana ; Gven, Glbanu ; Nkal, Dilek.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:27:y:2007:i:2:p:397-409.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  31. Laypeoples and Experts Perception of Nanotechnology Hazards. (2007). Frey, Silvia ; Siegrist, Michael ; Kastenholz, Hans ; Keller, Carmen ; Wiek, Arnim.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:27:y:2007:i:1:p:59-69.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  32. Exploring the Structure of Attitudes Toward Genetically Modified Food. (2006). Poortinga, Wouter ; Pidgeon, Nick F.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:26:y:2006:i:6:p:1707-1719.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  33. Implicit Attitudes Toward Nuclear Power and Mobile Phone Base Stations: Support for the Affect Heuristic. (2006). Siegrist, Michael ; Cousin, Mariea Eve ; Keller, Carmen.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:26:y:2006:i:4:p:1021-1029.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  34. Current Directions in Risk Research: New Developments in Psychology and Sociology. (2006). Gooby, Peter Taylora ; Zinn, Jens O.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:26:y:2006:i:2:p:397-411.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  35. Perception of Mobile Phone and Base Station Risks. (2005). Earle, Timothy C ; Siegrist, Michael ; Gutscher, Heinz ; Keller, Carmen.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:25:y:2005:i:5:p:1253-1264.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  36. Risk Perception of the “Mad Cow Disease” in France: Determinants and Consequences. (2005). Setbon, Michel ; Raude, Jocelyn ; Fischler, Claude ; Flahault, Antoine.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:25:y:2005:i:4:p:813-826.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  37. Testing and Expanding a Model of Cognitive Processing of Risk Information. (2005). Johnson, Branden B.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:25:y:2005:i:3:p:631-650.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  38. Using Surveys in Public Participation Processes for Risk Decision Making: The Case of the 2003 British GM Nation? Public Debate. (2005). Jones, Tom Horlicka ; O'Riordan, Tim ; Pidgeon, Nick F ; Walls, John ; Rowe, Gene ; Poortinga, Wouter.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:25:y:2005:i:2:p:467-479.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  39. Trust in Risk Regulation: Cause or Consequence of the Acceptability of GM Food?. (2005). Poortinga, Wouter ; Pidgeon, Nick F.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:25:y:2005:i:1:p:199-209.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  40. Major Psychological Factors Affecting Acceptance of Gene‐Recombination Technology. (2004). Tanaka, Yutaka.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:24:y:2004:i:6:p:1575-1583.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  41. An Emotion‐Based Model of Risk Perception and Stigma Susceptibility: Cognitive Appraisals of Emotion, Affective Reactivity, Worldviews, and Risk Perceptions in the Generation of Technological Stigma. (2004). Peters, Ellen M ; Mertz, C K ; Burraston, Burt.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:24:y:2004:i:5:p:1349-1367.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  42. Expert and Public Perception of Risk from Biotechnology. (2004). Rumiati, Rino ; Slovic, Paul ; Finucane, Melissa ; Savadori, Lucia ; Nicotra, Eraldo ; Savio, Stefania.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:24:y:2004:i:5:p:1289-1299.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  43. Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality. (2004). Slovic, Paul ; Finucane, Melissa L ; Peters, Ellen ; MacGregor, Donald G.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:24:y:2004:i:2:p:311-322.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  44. Risk Perception in a Developing Country: The Case of Chile. (2003). Bronfman, Nicols C ; Cifuentes, Luis A.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:23:y:2003:i:6:p:1271-1285.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  45. Consumer Risk Perceptions Toward Agricultural Biotechnology, Self‐Protection, and Food Demand: The Case of Milk in the United States. (2003). Ye, Soa ; Douthitt, Robin ; Zepeda, Lydia.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:23:y:2003:i:5:p:973-984.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  46. Exploring the Dimensionality of Trust in Risk Regulation. (2003). Poortinga, Wouter ; Pidgeon, Nick F.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:23:y:2003:i:5:p:961-972.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  47. Communicating Worst‐Case Scenarios: Neighbors Views of Industrial Accident Management. (2003). Chess, Caron ; Johnson, Branden B.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:23:y:2003:i:4:p:829-840.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  48. Using Risk Communication to Disclose the Outcome of a Participatory Decision‐Making Process: Effects on the Perceived Acceptability of Risk‐Policy Decisions. (2003). Arvai, Joseph L.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:23:y:2003:i:2:p:281-289.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  49. Potential Exposures and Risks from Beryllium‐Containing Products. (2002). Florig, Keith H ; Willis, Henry H.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:22:y:2002:i:5:p:1019-1033.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

  50. Perception of Ecological Risk to Water Environments. (1997). McDaniels, Timothy L ; Slovic, Paul ; Cavanagh, Nigel S ; Axelrod, Lawrence J.
    In: Risk Analysis.
    RePEc:wly:riskan:v:17:y:1997:i:3:p:341-352.

    Full description at Econpapers || Download paper

Coauthors

Authors registered in RePEc who have wrote about the same topic

Report date: 2025-09-27 16:38:05 || Missing content? Let us know

CitEc is a RePEc service, providing citation data for Economics since 2001. Last updated August, 3 2024. Contact: Jose Manuel Barrueco.