Search results

In this study, the authors clarified the differences in consumers' benefit–risk perceptions based on changes (description order and amount) in the benefit–risk information after an assessment of the health impact of foods.

The authors set the following four benefit–risk information groups relating to fatty fish consumption—Group 1: benefit/simple–risk/detail; Group 2: risk/detail–benefit/simple; Group 3: benefit/detail–risk/detail; Group 4: risk/detail–benefit/detail. The authors conducted a randomized controlled study on June, 2022, involving 7,200 Japanese consumers aged over 18 years.

There were no significant differences in the risk and benefit perceptions. Furthermore, the logistic regression analysis identified women and benefit perception as significant influencing factors of “no-risk acceptance.”

This study found that all four message formats were acceptable to consumers due to high-benefit/low-risk perceptions. However, despite the difference in message types used in benefit–risk communication, there was no effect on risk acceptance among consumers. Public agencies should design their communication with considerations toward women and benefit perceptions.