Recency negativity: Newer food crops are evaluated less favorably.
Journal
Appetite
ISSN: 1095-8304
Titre abrégé: Appetite
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8006808
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 11 2020
01 11 2020
Historique:
received:
08
02
2020
revised:
25
04
2020
accepted:
22
05
2020
pubmed:
12
6
2020
medline:
25
6
2021
entrez:
12
6
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Food crops produced by new technologies such as genetic engineering are widely opposed (Gaskell, Bauer, Durant, & Allum, 1999; Scott, Inbar, Wirz, Brossard, & Rozin, 2018). Here, we examine one reason for this opposition: recency. More recently-developed crops are evaluated less favorably, whether they are produced by artificial selection (i.e., conventional breeding), natural or man-made irradiation, or genetic engineering. Negative effects of recency persist in a within-subjects design where people are able to explicitly compare crops developed at different times, and an internal meta-analysis shows that the negative effect of recency is robust across measures and stimuli. These results have implications for the evaluation of crops produced using new modification techniques, including the widespread opposition to genetic engineering.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32522592
pii: S0195-6663(20)30196-3
doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2020.104754
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
104754Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.