• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

食品安全风险信息搜索意愿——中国微信用户。

Food Safety Risk Information-Seeking Intention of WeChat Users in China.

机构信息

College of Economics and Management, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China.

Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, Louisiana State University (LSU) and LSU Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA.

出版信息

Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Mar 31;17(7):2376. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17072376.

DOI:10.3390/ijerph17072376
PMID:32244472
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7177356/
Abstract

Consumers' food safety risk information-seeking behavior plays a vital role in improving their food quality and safety awareness and preventing food safety risks. Based on the Risk Information Seeking and Processing Model (RISP), this paper empirically analyzes the food safety risk information-seeking intention of consumers in WeChat and influencing factors under the impact of food safety incidents. We use data from 774 WeChat users and apply the Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) approach. We also conduct multigroup analysis with demographic characteristics as moderating variables. The results demonstrated that: (1) Risk perception ( ≤ 0.01) has direct significant positive effects on consumers' intention to seek food safety information. Besides, higher risk perception ( ≤ 0.01) regarding food safety risks will make people feel more anxious and threatened, and then expand the gap between the information they need and the relevant knowledge they actually have ( ≤ 0.1), which will further stimulate them to seek more information ( ≤ 0.05). (2) Informational subjective norms ( ≤ 0.01) can not only directly affect consumers' information-seeking about food safety, but also indirectly affect consumers' intention through information insufficiency ( ≤ 0.01). (3) The more consumers trust the relevant channels ( ≤ 0.01), the stronger their intention to search for food safety risk information. Moreover, the multiple-group analysis also shows that the effects of consumers' gender, age, educational background, and average monthly earnings are different among different groups. Furthermore, implications are put forward for food safety risk communication efforts in China.

摘要

消费者食品安全风险信息寻求行为对于提高其食品质量安全意识和防范食品安全风险起着至关重要的作用。本研究基于风险信息寻求与处理模型(RISP),实证分析了食品安全事件冲击下消费者在微信平台上的食品安全风险信息寻求意向及其影响因素。我们使用了来自 774 名微信用户的数据,并采用结构方程模型(SEM)方法进行分析。同时,我们还进行了多群组分析,以人口统计学特征作为调节变量。结果表明:(1)风险感知(≤0.01)对消费者寻求食品安全信息的意愿具有直接显著的正向影响。此外,消费者对食品安全风险的感知越高(≤0.01),他们会感到更加焦虑和受到威胁,从而扩大他们所需信息与实际知识之间的差距(≤0.1),这将进一步刺激他们寻求更多信息(≤0.05)。(2)信息主观规范(≤0.01)不仅可以直接影响消费者对食品安全信息的寻求,还可以通过信息不足(≤0.01)间接影响消费者的信息寻求意向。(3)消费者对相关渠道的信任度越高(≤0.01),他们搜索食品安全风险信息的意愿就越强。此外,多群组分析还表明,消费者的性别、年龄、教育背景和月均收入在不同群体之间的影响效果存在差异。最后,本研究为中国的食品安全风险沟通工作提出了启示。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2a06/7177356/615afd13b551/ijerph-17-02376-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2a06/7177356/ec32313646d6/ijerph-17-02376-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2a06/7177356/615afd13b551/ijerph-17-02376-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2a06/7177356/ec32313646d6/ijerph-17-02376-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2a06/7177356/615afd13b551/ijerph-17-02376-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Food Safety Risk Information-Seeking Intention of WeChat Users in China.食品安全风险信息搜索意愿——中国微信用户。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Mar 31;17(7):2376. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17072376.
2
Food Safety Trust, Risk Perception, and Consumers' Response to Company Trust Repair Actions in Food Recall Crises.食品安全信托、风险感知与消费者对食品召回危机中公司信任修复行为的反应
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Feb 17;17(4):1270. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17041270.
3
Seeking and using intention of health information from doctors in social media: The effect of doctor-consumer interaction.从社交媒体中的医生处寻求和使用健康信息的意图:医患互动的影响。
Int J Med Inform. 2018 Jul;115:106-113. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2018.04.009. Epub 2018 Apr 27.
4
Research on the Irrational Behavior of Consumers' Safe Consumption and Its Influencing Factors.消费者安全消费非理性行为及其影响因素研究。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Dec 6;15(12):2764. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15122764.
5
Consumer-perceived risks of genetically modified food in China.中国消费者对转基因食品的认知风险。
Appetite. 2020 Apr 1;147:104520. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2019.104520. Epub 2019 Nov 18.
6
The influence of traceability label trust on consumers' traceability pork purchasing behavior: Based on the moderating effect of food safety identification.可追溯标签信任对消费者追溯性猪肉购买行为的影响:基于食品安全识别的调节作用。
PLoS One. 2024 Jun 28;19(6):e0306041. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306041. eCollection 2024.
7
Recognition of Consumers' Characteristics of Purchasing Farm Produce with Safety Certificates and Their Influencing Factors.消费者对带安全认证标志农产品购买特征的识别及其影响因素分析。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Dec 15;15(12):2879. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15122879.
8
Consumers' Food Safety Risk Communication on Social Media Following the Suan Tang Zi Accident: An Extended Protection Motivation Theory Perspective.社交媒体中“苏丹红事件”后的消费者食品安全风险沟通:扩展保护动机理论视角
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jul 30;18(15):8080. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18158080.
9
Food Safety Gaps between Consumers' Expectations and Perceptions: Development and Verification of a Gap-Assessment Tool.消费者期望与认知之间的食品安全差距:差距评估工具的开发与验证。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Aug 31;17(17):6328. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17176328.
10
Understanding Consumers' Intentions to Purchase Clean Label Products: Evidence from Taiwan.理解消费者购买清洁标签产品的意图:来自台湾的证据。
Nutrients. 2022 Sep 6;14(18):3684. doi: 10.3390/nu14183684.

引用本文的文献

1
Are Remitters at Risk for Lower Food Security and Dietary Quality? An Exploratory Study of Mexican Immigrants in NYC.汇款者是否面临粮食安全和饮食质量较低的风险?对纽约市墨西哥移民的一项探索性研究。
Community Health Equity Res Policy. 2025 Jun 20:2752535X251355455. doi: 10.1177/2752535X251355455.
2
Cognitive and preference disparities of Chinese consumers regarding the disclosure of unsafe food recall information.中国消费者在不安全食品召回信息披露方面的认知与偏好差异
Front Public Health. 2024 Dec 9;12:1467518. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1467518. eCollection 2024.
3
Study of the Correlation between Streaming Video Platform Content on Food Production Processes and the Behavioral Intentions of Generation Z.

本文引用的文献

1
Does Information Pattern Affect Risk Perception of Food Safety? A National Survey in China.信息模式是否会影响食品安全风险感知?来自中国的全国性调查。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Sep 5;15(9):1935. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15091935.
2
The spread model of food safety risk under the supply-demand disturbance.供需扰动下食品安全风险的传播模型
Springerplus. 2016 Oct 11;5(1):1765. doi: 10.1186/s40064-016-2881-2. eCollection 2016.
3
German version of the Yale Food Addiction Scale 2.0: Prevalence and correlates of 'food addiction' in students and obese individuals.
流媒体视频平台上食品生产过程内容与Z世代行为意图的相关性研究
Foods. 2024 May 15;13(10):1537. doi: 10.3390/foods13101537.
4
Positive Emotion and Media Dependence: Measuring Risk Information Seeking and Perception in the COVID-19 Pandemic Prevention.积极情绪与媒体依赖:新冠疫情预防中的风险信息寻求与感知测量
Inquiry. 2023 Jan-Dec;60:469580231159747. doi: 10.1177/00469580231159747.
5
Analysis of the Influencing Factors of Seeking Intention on COVID-19 Risk Information: A Cross-Sectional Study.新型冠状病毒肺炎风险信息寻求意愿的影响因素分析:一项横断面研究
Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2023 Feb 8;16:185-197. doi: 10.2147/RMHP.S393401. eCollection 2023.
6
Food Fraud Vulnerability Assessment in the Chinese Baijiu Supply Chain.中国白酒供应链中的食品欺诈脆弱性评估
Foods. 2023 Jan 23;12(3):516. doi: 10.3390/foods12030516.
7
Explaining education-based difference in systematic processing of COVID-19 information: Insights into global recovery from infodemic.解释基于教育程度在对新冠疫情信息进行系统性处理方面的差异:对从信息疫情中实现全球复苏的见解。
Inf Process Manag. 2022 Jul;59(4):102989. doi: 10.1016/j.ipm.2022.102989. Epub 2022 Jun 1.
8
What Motivates Consumer Food Safety Perceptions and Beliefs? A Scoping Review in BRICS Countries.是什么影响了消费者对食品安全的认知和信念?金砖国家的一项范围综述。
Foods. 2022 Feb 1;11(3):432. doi: 10.3390/foods11030432.
9
Is "Wild" a Food Quality Attribute? Heavy Metal Content in Wild and Cultivated Sea Buckthorn and Consumers' Risk Perception.“野生”是一种食品质量属性吗?野生和栽培沙棘中的重金属含量及消费者的风险认知。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Sep 8;18(18):9463. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18189463.
10
Consumers' Food Safety Risk Communication on Social Media Following the Suan Tang Zi Accident: An Extended Protection Motivation Theory Perspective.社交媒体中“苏丹红事件”后的消费者食品安全风险沟通:扩展保护动机理论视角
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jul 30;18(15):8080. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18158080.
《耶鲁食物成瘾量表2.0》德文版:学生和肥胖个体中“食物成瘾”的患病率及相关因素
Appetite. 2017 Aug 1;115:54-61. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2016.10.003. Epub 2016 Oct 4.
4
Personal cancer knowledge and information seeking through PRISM: the planned risk information seeking model.通过 PRISM 进行个人癌症知识和信息搜索:计划风险信息搜索模型。
J Health Commun. 2014 Apr;19(4):511-27. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2013.821556. Epub 2014 Jan 16.
5
Food supply and food safety issues in China.中国的食物供给与食品安全问题。
Lancet. 2013 Jun 8;381(9882):2044-53. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60776-X.
6
PRISM: a planned risk information seeking model.PRISM:一种计划性风险信息寻求模型。
Health Commun. 2010 Jun;25(4):345-56. doi: 10.1080/10410231003775172.
7
Fitting hierarchical holographic modeling into the theory of scenario structuring and a resulting refinement to the quantitative definition of risk.将分层全息建模融入情景构建理论,并由此对风险的定量定义进行完善。
Risk Anal. 2001 Oct;21(5):807-19. doi: 10.1111/0272-4332.215153.
8
Proposed model of the relationship of risk information seeking and processing to the development of preventive behaviors.风险信息寻求与处理和预防行为发展之间关系的拟议模型。
Environ Res. 1999 Feb;80(2 Pt 2):S230-S245. doi: 10.1006/enrs.1998.3940.