Disentangling Directand Indirect Effects of Credence Labels

D. Dentoni, G. Tonsor, R. Calantone, C. Peterson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to disentangle the direct and indirect effects of three credence labels (Australian, animal welfare and grass-fed) on US consumer attitudes toward buying beef steaks. Furthermore, it explores the impact of consumer attribute knowledge, usage frequency, education and opinion strength on the magnitude of direct and indirect effects. Design/methodology/approach – Data are collected through an online experiment with 460 US consumers and analyzed with path modeling. Findings – The Australian label generates a 86 percent negative direct effect vs a 14 percent negative indirect effect on consumer attitudes, which means that US consumers do not make strong inferences to form their attitudes toward buying Australian beef. The animal welfare label generates 50 percent direct and 50 percent indirect effects. The grass-fed label generates only indirect effects (100 percent). The higher consumer education, attribute knowledge, usage frequency, education and opinion strength, the weaker are the indirect effects of credence labels. Research limitations/implications – The study focusses on consumers in one country (USA), one product (beef steak) and one label across three attributes, therefore generalization of results is limited. Practical implications – The study offers a tool to agribusiness managers as well as to policy makers, NGOs and consumer groups to design and assess the effectiveness of communication campaigns attempting to strengthen (or weaken) consumer inferences and attitudes relative to credence labels. Originality/value – Despite the wide literature on consumer inferences based on credence labels, this is the first study that quantitatively disentangles the complex set of inferential effects generated by credence labels and explores common relationships across multiple credence attributes.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)931-951
JournalBritish Food Journal
Volume116
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Animal Welfare
Poaceae
Education
consumer attitudes
beef
steaks
purchasing
animal welfare
Administrative Personnel
education
consumer education
grasses
Communication
agribusiness
higher education
communication (human)
Indirect effects
Research
managers
Red Meat

Keywords

  • country-of-origin
  • willingness-to-pay
  • farm-animal welfare
  • food-products
  • united-states
  • organic food
  • quality
  • beef
  • consumers
  • safety

Cite this

Dentoni, D. ; Tonsor, G. ; Calantone, R. ; Peterson, C. / Disentangling Directand Indirect Effects of Credence Labels. In: British Food Journal. 2014 ; Vol. 116, No. 6. pp. 931-951.
@article{360dd62f4ef34bb0bc65528f8da3c57e,
title = "Disentangling Directand Indirect Effects of Credence Labels",
abstract = "The purpose of this paper is to disentangle the direct and indirect effects of three credence labels (Australian, animal welfare and grass-fed) on US consumer attitudes toward buying beef steaks. Furthermore, it explores the impact of consumer attribute knowledge, usage frequency, education and opinion strength on the magnitude of direct and indirect effects. Design/methodology/approach – Data are collected through an online experiment with 460 US consumers and analyzed with path modeling. Findings – The Australian label generates a 86 percent negative direct effect vs a 14 percent negative indirect effect on consumer attitudes, which means that US consumers do not make strong inferences to form their attitudes toward buying Australian beef. The animal welfare label generates 50 percent direct and 50 percent indirect effects. The grass-fed label generates only indirect effects (100 percent). The higher consumer education, attribute knowledge, usage frequency, education and opinion strength, the weaker are the indirect effects of credence labels. Research limitations/implications – The study focusses on consumers in one country (USA), one product (beef steak) and one label across three attributes, therefore generalization of results is limited. Practical implications – The study offers a tool to agribusiness managers as well as to policy makers, NGOs and consumer groups to design and assess the effectiveness of communication campaigns attempting to strengthen (or weaken) consumer inferences and attitudes relative to credence labels. Originality/value – Despite the wide literature on consumer inferences based on credence labels, this is the first study that quantitatively disentangles the complex set of inferential effects generated by credence labels and explores common relationships across multiple credence attributes.",
keywords = "country-of-origin, willingness-to-pay, farm-animal welfare, food-products, united-states, organic food, quality, beef, consumers, safety",
author = "D. Dentoni and G. Tonsor and R. Calantone and C. Peterson",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1108/BFJ-09-2012-0227",
language = "English",
volume = "116",
pages = "931--951",
journal = "British Food Journal",
issn = "0007-070X",
publisher = "Emerald",
number = "6",

}

Disentangling Directand Indirect Effects of Credence Labels. / Dentoni, D.; Tonsor, G.; Calantone, R.; Peterson, C.

In: British Food Journal, Vol. 116, No. 6, 2014, p. 931-951.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Disentangling Directand Indirect Effects of Credence Labels

AU - Dentoni, D.

AU - Tonsor, G.

AU - Calantone, R.

AU - Peterson, C.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - The purpose of this paper is to disentangle the direct and indirect effects of three credence labels (Australian, animal welfare and grass-fed) on US consumer attitudes toward buying beef steaks. Furthermore, it explores the impact of consumer attribute knowledge, usage frequency, education and opinion strength on the magnitude of direct and indirect effects. Design/methodology/approach – Data are collected through an online experiment with 460 US consumers and analyzed with path modeling. Findings – The Australian label generates a 86 percent negative direct effect vs a 14 percent negative indirect effect on consumer attitudes, which means that US consumers do not make strong inferences to form their attitudes toward buying Australian beef. The animal welfare label generates 50 percent direct and 50 percent indirect effects. The grass-fed label generates only indirect effects (100 percent). The higher consumer education, attribute knowledge, usage frequency, education and opinion strength, the weaker are the indirect effects of credence labels. Research limitations/implications – The study focusses on consumers in one country (USA), one product (beef steak) and one label across three attributes, therefore generalization of results is limited. Practical implications – The study offers a tool to agribusiness managers as well as to policy makers, NGOs and consumer groups to design and assess the effectiveness of communication campaigns attempting to strengthen (or weaken) consumer inferences and attitudes relative to credence labels. Originality/value – Despite the wide literature on consumer inferences based on credence labels, this is the first study that quantitatively disentangles the complex set of inferential effects generated by credence labels and explores common relationships across multiple credence attributes.

AB - The purpose of this paper is to disentangle the direct and indirect effects of three credence labels (Australian, animal welfare and grass-fed) on US consumer attitudes toward buying beef steaks. Furthermore, it explores the impact of consumer attribute knowledge, usage frequency, education and opinion strength on the magnitude of direct and indirect effects. Design/methodology/approach – Data are collected through an online experiment with 460 US consumers and analyzed with path modeling. Findings – The Australian label generates a 86 percent negative direct effect vs a 14 percent negative indirect effect on consumer attitudes, which means that US consumers do not make strong inferences to form their attitudes toward buying Australian beef. The animal welfare label generates 50 percent direct and 50 percent indirect effects. The grass-fed label generates only indirect effects (100 percent). The higher consumer education, attribute knowledge, usage frequency, education and opinion strength, the weaker are the indirect effects of credence labels. Research limitations/implications – The study focusses on consumers in one country (USA), one product (beef steak) and one label across three attributes, therefore generalization of results is limited. Practical implications – The study offers a tool to agribusiness managers as well as to policy makers, NGOs and consumer groups to design and assess the effectiveness of communication campaigns attempting to strengthen (or weaken) consumer inferences and attitudes relative to credence labels. Originality/value – Despite the wide literature on consumer inferences based on credence labels, this is the first study that quantitatively disentangles the complex set of inferential effects generated by credence labels and explores common relationships across multiple credence attributes.

KW - country-of-origin

KW - willingness-to-pay

KW - farm-animal welfare

KW - food-products

KW - united-states

KW - organic food

KW - quality

KW - beef

KW - consumers

KW - safety

U2 - 10.1108/BFJ-09-2012-0227

DO - 10.1108/BFJ-09-2012-0227

M3 - Article

VL - 116

SP - 931

EP - 951

JO - British Food Journal

JF - British Food Journal

SN - 0007-070X

IS - 6

ER -