Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34411110›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Perceived subjective versus objective knowledge: Consumer valuation of genetically modified certification on food producing plants.

Alicia Rihn, Hayk Khachatryan, Xuan Wei

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Alicia RihnDepartment of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Tennessee-Knoxville, Knoxville, TN, United States of America.
Hayk KhachatryanFood and Resource Economics Department and Mid-Florida Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Apopka, FL, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-2387-3624
Xuan WeiFood and Resource Economics Department and Mid-Florida Research and Education Center, University of Florida, Apopka, FL, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous research has identified subjective and objective knowledge as determinants of consumers' acceptance of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in the medical and food industries. In contrast to a large body of literature on the effects of attitudes or knowledge on food preferences, the extent to which consumers' knowledge affects their valuation of non-GMO food producing plants (i.e., plants grown for food or ornamental purposes) is less understood. This manuscript investigates the relationship between consumers' knowledge of relevant non-GMO certification programs and their acceptance and willingness-to-pay (WTP) for non-GMO plants. The first study used an Internet respondent panel and choice experiment, while the second study utilized an in-person experimental auction. In line with previously reported low public acceptance of genetically modified food products, respondents were receptive of and willing to pay premiums for non-GMO food producing plants. This study found that subjective and objective knowledge impacted the premiums for non-GMO labels, with the high subjective and low objective knowledge group generating the highest WTP. Low subjective and low objective knowledge resulted in the lowest WTP. Findings suggest a disconnect between subjective and objective knowledge of non-GMO certification programs, which in turn influences consumer valuation of those products.

Indexed as

Consumer BehaviorFood, Genetically ModifiedPlants, Genetically ModifiedAdolescentAdultCertificationFemaleHumansKnowledgeMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID34411110
PMCPMC8376035

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.