title: Surveys suck: Consumer preferences when purchasing genetically engineered foods.
abstract: Many studies have attempted to gauge consumers' acceptance of genetically engineered or modified (GM) foods. Surveys, asking people about attitudes and intentions, are easy-to-collect proxies of consumer behavior. However, participants tend to respond as citizens of society, not discrete individuals, thereby inaccurately portraying their potential behavior. The Theory of Planned Behavior improved the accuracy of self-reported information, but its limited capacity to account for intention variance has been attributed to the hypothetical scenarios to which survey participants must respond. Valuation methods, asking how much consumers may be willing to pay or accept for GM foods, have revealed that consumers are usually willing to accept them at some price, or in some cases willing to pay a premium. Ultimately, it's consumers' actual--not intended--behavior that is of most interest to policy makers and business decision-makers. Real choice experiments offer the best avenue for revealing consumers' food choices in normal life.
authors.affiliation: Powell Food Safety; Brisbane, Australia.
authors.forename: Douglas A
authors.initials: DA
authors.lastname: Powell
mesh_terms: D001290:Attitude; D002755:Choice Behavior; D003132:Commerce / Q000191:economics*; D003258:Consumer Behavior / Q000191:economics*; D003625:Data Collection; D030841:Food, Genetically Modified / Q000191:economics*; D006801:Humans
keywords: GM food; consumer behavior; genetically modified; theory of planned behavior