“Listen, did you hear…?” A structural equation model explaining online information sharing on the risks of nanotechnology in food

In order to encourage consumer informed decision making, it is in the interest of risk communicators in the food industry and authorities to facilitate consumer risk information sharing. Focusing on the risks of nanotechnology in food products, this study aimed to develop and test a model that describes the processes that result in the online sharing of risk information on food products. The model was based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour, the Risk Information Seeking and Processing model and the broader risk perception and communication literature. A cross-sectional online survey has been carried out among a representative sample of adults > 18 years of age in the Netherlands (n = 511). Attitude, self-efficacy, and injunctive and descriptive subjective norms in relation to information sharing were measured, as were information need, information seeking, trust, risk perception and anxiety in relation to the application of nanotechnology in food products. Structural equation modelling (SEM) was applied to test the determinants of information sharing behaviour, and their relationships. Results showed that the intention to share information about the risks of nanotechnology in food online was medium-low. The hypothesized model as a whole fitted the data and nine of the fourteen path coefficients were highly significant. Results showed injunctive norms to be the main determinant of information sharing. Attitude and information seeking also contributed to the explanation of the variance in information sharing. Results are put into the perspective of relevant theoretical viewpoints and empirical findings. Implications for food risk communication and the facilitation of informed decision making are discussed

Crime communication at information meetings

In a quasi-experiment the effects of information meetings concerning residential burglary were investigated. The objective was to increase knowledge of burglary in order (1) to bring the fear of burglary more into line with the risks involved and (2) to encourage adequate preventive behaviour. The information led to an increase in knowledge, outcome expectation and self-efficacy expectation and an intention to implement preventive behaviour. Risk assessment and fear of burglary were not affected. Our conclusion was that information meetings are a useful strategy to increase knowledge of crime and to encourage preventive behaviour

The role of expertise in risk communication:Laypeople’s and expert’s perception of the millennium bug risk in the netherlands

This paper focuses on the discussion of the role of expertise in risk communication. It describes empirical data on the risks posed by the Millennium bug in 1999 in the Netherlands. The study systematically examined the risk perception of both general public and computer experts with respect to the Millennium bug, assessing a potential discrepancy between the layman’s and the expert’s judgement, as has been observed in other risk areas. Two surveys were fielded, the first aimed at a random sample of the Dutch population (n = 253), the second at a sample of computer experts (n = 91). Results indicated that respondents did not perceive the Millennium bug to be a major threat. However, laypeople worried more, did see the issue as more personally risky, and did think the level of public awareness was higher than experts did. Computer experts felt more capable of taking mitigating actions than laypeople, and were more convinced that these actions were adequate. The implications of these findings for the role of expertise in risk communication are discussed

Development of strategies for effective communication of food risks and benefits across Europe: Design and conceptual framework of the FoodRisC project

The FoodRisC project is funded under the Seventh Framework Programme (CORDIS FP7) of the European Commission; Grant agreement no.: 245124. Copyright @ 2011 Barnett et al.BACKGROUND: European consumers are faced with a myriad of food related risk and benefit information and it is regularly left up to the consumer to interpret these, often conflicting, pieces of information as a coherent message. This conflict is especially apparent in times of food crises and can have major public health implications. Scientific results and risk assessments cannot always be easily communicated into simple guidelines and advice that non-scientists like the public or the media can easily understand especially when there is conflicting, uncertain or complex information about a particular food or aspects thereof. The need for improved strategies and tools for communication about food risks and benefits is therefore paramount. The FoodRisC project ("Food Risk Communication - Perceptions and communication of food risks/benefits across Europe: development of effective communication strategies") aims to address this issue. The FoodRisC project will examine consumer perceptions and investigate how people acquire and use information in food domains in order to develop targeted strategies for food communication across Europe.METHODS/DESIGN: This project consists of 6 research work packages which, using qualitative and quantitative methodologies, are focused on development of a framework for investigating food risk/benefit issues across Europe, exploration of the role of new and traditional media in food communication and testing of the framework in order to develop evidence based communication strategies and tools. The main outcome of the FoodRisC project will be a toolkit to enable coherent communication of food risk/benefit messages in Europe. The toolkit will integrate theoretical models and new measurement paradigms as well as building on social marketing approaches around consumer segmentation. Use of the toolkit and guides will assist policy makers, food authorities and other end users in developing common approaches to communicating coherent messages to consumers in Europe.DISCUSSION: The FoodRisC project offers a unique approach to the investigation of food risk/benefit communication. The effective spread of food risk/benefit information will assist initiatives aimed at reducing the burden of food-related illness and disease, reducing the economic impact of food crises and ensuring that confidence in safe and nutritious food is fostered and maintained in Europe.This article is available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund

Social media as a platform for health-related public debates and discussions: the Polio vaccine on Facebook

BACKGROUND: Social media can act as an important platform for debating, discussing, and disseminating information about vaccines. Our objectives were to map and describe the roles played by web-based mainstream media and social media as platforms for vaccination-related public debates and discussions during the Polio crisis in Israel in 2013: where and how did the public debate and discuss the issue, and how can these debates and discussions be characterized? METHOD: Polio-related coverage was collected from May 28 to October 31, 2013, from seven online Hebrew media platforms and the Facebook groups discussing the Polio vaccination were mapped and described. In addition, 2,289 items from the Facebook group “Parents talk about Polio vaccination” were analyzed for socio-demographic and thematic characteristics. RESULTS: The traditional media mainly echoed formal voices from the Ministry of Health. The comments on the Facebook vaccination opposition groups could be divided into four groups: comments with individualistic perceptions, comments that expressed concerns about the safety of the OPV, comments that expressed distrust in the Ministry of Health, and comments denying Polio as a disease. In the Facebook group “Parents talk about the Polio vaccination”, an active group with various participants, 321 commentators submitted 2289 comments, with 64 % of the comments written by women. Most (92 %) people involved were parents. The comments were both personal (referring to specific situations) and general in nature (referring to symptoms or wide implications). A few (13 %) of the commentators were physicians (n = 44), who were responsible for 909 (40 %) of the items in the sample. Half the doctors and 6 % of the non-doctors wrote over 10 items each. This Facebook group formed a unique platform where unmediated debates and discussions between the public and medical experts took place. CONCLUSION: The comments on the social media, as well as the socio-demographic profiles of the commentators, suggest that social media is an active and versatile debate and discussion-facilitating platform in the context of vaccinations. This paper presents public voices, which should be seen as authentic (i.e. unmediated by the media or other political actors) and useful for policy making purposes. The policy implications include identifying social media as a main channel of communication during health crises, and acknowledging the voices heard on social media as authentic and useful for policy making. Human and financial resources need to be devolved specifically to social media. Health officials and experts need to be accessible on social media, and be equipped to readily provide the information, support and advice the public is looking for