Why trust is crucial – the moderating role of trust in the relationship between motivation and intention to buy healthy, sustainable and novel foods.

Lists

Tools

Macready, A. L. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0368-9336, Hieke, S., Klimczuk-Kochańska, M., Szumiał, S., Wachter, K., Arnoult, M. H., Vranken, L. and Grunert, K. G. (2025) Why trust is crucial – the moderating role of trust in the relationship between motivation and intention to buy healthy, sustainable and novel foods. Food Quality and Preference, 126. 105386. ISSN 1873-6343

Text - Accepted Version
· Restricted to Repository staff only
· The Copyright of this document has not been checked yet. This may affect its availability.
2MB

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

To link to this item DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2024.105386

Abstract/Summary

Within an increasingly resource-challenged food system, consumers need greater confidence in their ability to make better and more informed food choices. We investigated the role of trust as a moderator of the relationship between the motivation to make healthy, sustainable and novel food choices and the intention to actually do so, based on the reasoning that novel healthy and sustainable food products are marketed by credence attributes, where consumers must rely on information that is provided by food chain actors. In an online survey conducted in 13 European countries over two years with a sample of 25,610 respondents, we explored how social trust, beliefs in trustworthiness and overall trust moderate the motivation-intention relationship. Results show that while trust cannot compensate for a lack of motivation to engage in healthy or sustainable behaviours, the relationship between motivation and intention was strengthened by higher levels of trust for sustainable and innovative food choices, but not for healthy food choices, and this finding was largely consistent across both years. For sustainable choices, the motivation-intention relationship was moderated by trust in farmers and retailers but not in manufacturers or authorities. All types of trust moderated the motivation-intention relationship for adoption of novel foods. This has implications for investment in trust initiatives on the part of policymakers, food businesses and food system actors.

Item Type:	Article
Refereed:	Yes
Divisions:	Interdisciplinary centres and themes > Food Chain and Health Interdisciplinary centres and themes > Centre for Food Security Interdisciplinary Research Centres (IDRCs) > Institute for Food, Nutrition and Health (IFNH) Life Sciences > School of Agriculture, Policy and Development > Department of Agri-Food Economics & Marketing
ID Code:	119691
Publisher:	Science Direct
Publisher Statement:	Articles in press are peer reviewed, accepted articles to be published in this publication. When the final article is assigned to volumes/issues of the publication, the article in press version will be removed and the final version will appear in the associated published volumes/issues of the publication. The date an article was first made available online will be carried over. Please be aware that, although articles in press do not have all bibliographic details available yet, they can already be cited using the year of online publication and the DOI, as follows: author(s), article title, Publication (year), DOI. Please consult the journal’s reference style for the exact appearance of these elements, abbreviation of journal names and use of punctuation. There are three types of Articles in Press: Journal pre-proofs: versions of an article that have undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but are not yet definitive versions of record. These versions will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before being published in final form, but are provided to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. Uncorrected proofs: articles that have been copy edited and formatted, but have not been finalized yet. They still need to be proof-read and corrected by the author(s) and the text could still change before final publication. Corrected proofs: articles that contain the authors' corrections. Final citation details, e.g. volume and/or issue number, publication year and page numbers, still need to be added and the text might change before final publication. ISSN: 0950-3293 Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.

Altmetric

Deposit Details

References

Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes . 50, 179 -211. Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action. Prentice -Hall. Bandura, A. (1991). Human agency: The rhetoric and the reality. American Psychologist, 46, 157 -162. Bandura, A. & Locke, E.A. (2003). Negative self -efficacy and goal effects revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 87. Bauer, D.J., & Curran, P.J. (2005). Probing interactions in fixed and multilevel regression: Inferential and graphical techniques. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 373 -400. Becker, T. (1999). The economics of food quality standards . Proceedings of the Second Interdisciplinary Workshop on Standardization Research, University of the Federal Armed Forces Hamburg, p. 27. Berg, L., Kjaernes, U., Ganskau, E., Minina, V., Voltchkova, L., Halkier, B. & Holm, L. (2005). Trust in food safety in Russia, Denmark and Norway. European Societies , 7, 103 -129. Brunsø, K., Birch, D., Memery, J., Temesi, Á., Lakner, Z., Lang, M., Dean, D. & Grunert, K.G. (2021). Core dimensions of food -related lifestyle: A new instrument for measuring food involvement, innovativeness and responsibility. Food Quality and Preference, 91, 104192. Carfora, V., Cavallo, C., Caso, D., Del Giudice, T., De Devitiis, B., Viscecchia, R., Nardone, G. & Cicia, G. (2019). Explaining consumer purchase behavior for organic milk: Including trust and green self - identity within the theory of planned behavior. Food Quality and Preference, 76, 1 -9. Caswell, J.A.& Mojduszka, E.M. (1996). Using informational labeling to influence the market for quality in food products. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 78, 1248 -1253. Clark, M.A., Springmann, M., Hill, J.,´& Tilman, D. (2019). Multiple health and environmental impacts of foods. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116, 23357 -23362. Darby, M.R. & Karni, E. (1973). Free competition and the optimal amount of fraud. The Journal of Law and Economics, 16, 67 -88. De Jonge, J., Van Trijp, H., Goddard, E. & Frewer, L. (2008a). Consumer confidence in the safety of food in Canada and the Netherlands: The validation of a generic framework. Food Quality and Preference, 19, 439 -451. De Jonge, J., Van Trijp, H., Jan Renes, R., & Frewer, L. (2007). Understanding consumer confidence in the safety of food: Its two‐dimensional structure and determinants. Risk Analysis, 27, 729 -740. De Jonge, J., Van Trijp, J., van der Lans, I.A., Renes, R.J. & Frewer, L.J. (2008b). How trust in institutions and organizations builds general consumer confidence in the safety of food: A decomposition of effects. Appetite, 51, 311 -317. Del Giudice, T., Cavallo, C.,´& Vecchio, R. (2018). Credence attributes, consumers trust and sensory expectations in modern food market: is there a need to redefine their role? International Journal on Food System Dynamics, 307 -313. Delhey, J., & Newton, K. (2005 ). Predicting cross -national levels of social trust: global pattern or Nordic exceptionalism? European Sociological Review, 21, 311 -327. Dunlap, R. (1978). The new environmental paradigm; A proposed measuring instrument and preliminary results. Journal of Environmental Education , 9, 10 -19. EC (2019 ). The European Green Deal: Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. European Commission, Brussels. EC (2020). Farm to Fork Strategy: For A Fair, Healthy and Environmentally -Friendly Food System. DG SANTE, Brussels. Ferrin, D. & Gillespie, N. (2010).. Trust differences across national -societal cultures: much to do, or much ado about nothing ? In M.N.K. Saunders, D. Skinner, G. Dietz, N. Gillespie & R.J. Lewicki (Eds.), Organizational Trust: A Cultural Perspective (pp. 42 -86 ) . Cambridge University Press. Goddard, E., Muringai, V. & Boaitey, A. (2019). Moral foundations and credence attributes in livestock production: Canada. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 36, 418 -428. Goldsmith, R.E., Hofacker, C.F. (1991). Measuring consumer innovativeness. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 19, 209 -221. Grunert, K.G. (2005). Food quality and safety: consumer perception and demand. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 32, 369 -391. Hayes, A.F. (2017). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression -Based Approach. Guilford Publications, London. Henchion, M.M., McCarthy, M. & Resconi, V.C. (2017). Beef quality attributes: A systematic review of consumer perspectives. Meat Science 128, 1 -7. Lassoued, R., Hobbs, J.E., Micheels, E.T., Zhang, D.D. (2015). Consumer trust in chicken brands: A structural equation model. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue Canadienne d'Agroeconomie, 63, 621 -647. Lewis, J.D. & Weigert, A. (1985). Trust as a social reality. Social Forces, 63, 967 -985. Liefeld, J.P. (2014). Experiments on country -of -origin effects: Review and meta -analysis of effect size, in: Papadopoulos, N., Heslop, L.A. (Eds.), Product -Country Images. Routledge, New York, pp. 117 -156. Lu, L. -C., Chang, H. -H. & Chang, A. (2015). Consumer personality and green buying intention: The mediate role of consumer ethical beliefs. Journal of Business Ethics, 127, 205 -219. Macready, A.L., Hieke, S., Klimczuk -Kochańska, M., Szumiał, S., Vranken, L. & Grunert, K.G. (2020). Consumer trust in the food value chain and its impact on consumer confidence: A model for assessing consumer trust and evidence from a 5 -country study in Europe. Food Policy, 92, 101880. Maddux, J.E. & Rogers, R.W. (1983). Protection motivation and self -efficacy: A revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 469 -479. McAllister, D.J. (1995). Affect -and cognition -based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal ,38, 24 -59. Meijer, G.W., Lähteenmäki, L., Stadler, R.H. & Weiss, J. (2021). Issues surrounding consumer trust and acceptance of existing and emerging food processing technologies. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition , 61, 97 -115. Midmore, P., Naspetti, S., Sherwood, A. -M., Vairo, D., Wier, M. & Zanoli, R. (2005). Consumer Attitudes to Quality and Safety of Organic and Low Input Foods: A Review . Report of EU -funded project “Improving Quality and Safety and Reduction of Cost in the European Organic and ‘Low Input’Food Supply Chains”. University of Wales, Aberystwyth. Nelson, P. (1970). Information and consumer behavior. Journal of Political Economy, 78, 311 -329. Nuttavuthisit, K. & Thøgersen, J. (2017). The importance of consumer trust for the emergence of a market for green products: The case of organic food. Journal of Business Ethics, 140, 323 -337. Pan, L. -Y. & Chiou, J. -S. (2011). How much can you trust online information? Cues for perceived trustworthiness of consumer -generated online information. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 25, 67 -74. Papadopoulou, P., Andreou, A., Kanellis, P. & Martakos, D. (2001). Building customer trust within e - commerce environments: The role of agents and virtual reality . Internet Research, 11, 322 -332. Poortinga, W., Pidgeon, N.F. (2003). Exploring the dimensionality of trust in risk regulation. Risk Analysis, 23, 961 -972. Roininen, K., Lähteenmäki, L. & Tuorila, H., 1999. Quantification of consumer attitudes to health and hedonic characteristics of foods. Appetite, 33, 71 -88. Rousseau, D.M., Sitkin, S.B., Burt, R.S. & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross -discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23, 393 -404. Rupprecht, C.D., Fujiyoshi, L., McGreevy, S.R.& Tayasu, I. (2020). Trust me? Consumer trust in expert information on food product labels. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 137, 111170. Russo, C., Simeone, M. & Perito, M.A. (2020). Educated millennials and credence attributes of food products with genetically modified organisms: Knowledge, trust and social media. Sustainability, 12, 8534. Sapp, S.G., Arnot, C., Fallon, J., Fleck, T., Soorholtz, D., Sutton‐Vermeulen, M. & Wilson, J.J. (2009). Consumer trust in the US food system: an examination of the recreancy theorem. Rural Sociology, 74, 525-545. Siegrist, M., Hartmann, C. (2020). Consumer acceptance of novel food technologies. Nature Food, 1, 343-350. Steenkamp, J.-B.E. (1990). Conceptual model of the quality perception process. Journal of Business Research, 21, 309-333. Steg, L. (2016). Values, norms, and intrinsic motivation to act proenvironmentally. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 41, 277-292. Sultan, P., Tarafder, T., Pearson, D. & Henryks, J. (2020). Intention-behaviour gap and perceived behavioural control-behaviour gap in theory of planned behaviour: Moderating roles of communication, satisfaction and trust in organic food consumption. Food Quality and Preference, 81, 103838. Szybillo, G.J. & Jacoby, J. (1974). Intrinsic versus extrinsic cues as determinants of perceived product quality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 74. Tandon, A., Dhir, A., Kaur, P., Kushwah, S. & Salo, J. (2020). Why do people buy organic food? The moderating role of environmental concerns and trust. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 57, 102247. Terlau, W. & Hirsch, D. (2015). Sustainable consumption and the attitude-behaviour-gap phenomenon-causes and measurements towards a sustainable development. Proceedings in Food System Dynamics, 199-214. Tilman, D. & Clark, M. (2014). Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature, 515, 518-522. Tonkin, E., Wilson, A.M., Coveney, J., Meyer, S.B., Henderson, J., McCullum, D., Webb, T. & Ward, P.R. (2019). Consumers respond to a model for (re) building consumer trust in the food system. Food Control, 101, 112-120. Vermeir, I. & Verbeke, W. (2006). Sustainable food consumption: Exploring the consumer “attitude– behavioral intention” gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 19, 169-194. Wessells, C.R. (2002). The economics of information: Markets for seafood attributes. Marine Resource Economics ,17, 153-162. Willett, W., Rockström, J., Loken, B., Springmann, M., Lang, T., Vermeulen, S., Garnett, T., Tilman, D., DeClerck, F. & Wood, A. (2019). Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. The Lancet, 393, 447-492. Williams, D.M. & Rhodes, R.E. (2016). The confounded self-efficacy construct: conceptual analysis and recommendations for future research. Health Psychology Review, 10, 113-128. Yamoah, F.A. & Acquaye, A. (2019). Unravelling the attitude-behaviour gap paradox for sustainable food consumption: Insight from the UK apple market. Journal of Cleaner Production, 217, 172- 184. Zhang, C.-Q., Zhang, R., Schwarzer, R. & Hagger, M.S. (2019). A meta-analysis of the health action process approach. Health Psychology, 38, 623.

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

University of Reading

CentAUR: Central Archive at the University of Reading

Accessibility navigation

Why trust is crucial – the moderating role of trust in the relationship between motivation and intention to buy healthy, sustainable and novel foods.

Abstract/Summary

Page navigation

See also

Footer navigation