© 2012 Center for Food Integrity
This information is wholly owned by the Foundation for Food Integrity and licensed to CFI; Study was conducted by Gestalt Inc.
The 2012 Consumer Trust Research was funded
by the Foundation for Food Integrity.
fund consumer research and
provide information and support consumer
THANK YOU
2012 National Research Sponsors
THANK YOU
2012 Research Supporters
THANK YOU
2012 State Research Sponsors
© 2012 Center for Food Integrity
What Drives Consumer Trust?
What Drives Consumer Trust?
© 2012 Center for Food Integrity
Balancing for Success
Balancing for Success
© 2012 Center for Food Integrity
Quantitative Research
9
© 2012 Center for Food Integrity
Methodology and Sample Design
Total of 2,001 completed surveys in
July 2012 (sampling error at 95%
confidence level +/- 2.2%)
Reflects general US population for education, income, political
orientation, consumer advocacy, vegetarianism. Split sample to
accommodate the survey content.
© 2012 Center for Food Integrity
MODELS
© 2012 Center for Food Integrity
Adoption/Diffusion
Past research has shown that the adopter
segments are normally distributed in a social
system/market (bell curve)
Early
Innovator Adopter
2.5%
13.5%
X - 2sd
X - 1sd
Late
Majority
34%
Early
Majority
34%
X
Laggards
16%
X - 1sd
Attributes of Early Adopters
Adapted from Rogers - 2003
Values Orientation
• Agriculture and the food system tend to be
science driven. Science tells us if we can do
something, society tells us if we should do it.
• The food community has long been
definitive in generating consensus or public
support for
practices.
• Your values-orientation strongly influences
what you believe agriculture and those in
the food system should do.
Identifying Prevalent Values Orientations Will Open
Doors for More Targeted Messaging
Values Orientation = The window through which individuals
view society and how that view influences the perception of
self and others.
– Adopter categorization and values orientation are issue specific
– Consumers frequently hold multiple Values Orientations on a single issue
–
information that effectively communicates practices that are aligned with
Using Values Orientation is not about trying to get
someone to change their values and beliefs about
today’s food.
Strategic Approach
It is about helping them understand that today’s
food is better aligned with their values and beliefs
than perhaps they thought.
Values Orientations Provide the Window
Through Which we Look at the World
Values Orientations Provide the Window
Through Which we Look at the World
Values Orientations Provide the Window
Through Which we Look at the World
Values Orientations Provide the Window
Through Which we Look at the World
Values Orientations Provide the Window
Through Which we Look at the World
Values Orientations Provide the Window
Through Which we Look at the World
Values Orientation is Issue Specific
Targeting by Issue is Vital to Success
Consumers can be grouped by Values Orientation in general but the
data in this study indicates that the Values Orientation viewpoint
shifts depending on the issue under study
ISSUE: Hormone Use
to Produce Leaner
Beef
Maria is
generally a
progressivist
Concerns about her
to be a traditionalist on
beef hormone use
Values Orientation Goal
Find the smallest number of messages that
have the greatest impact on the largest number
of people in the target population
Key Learnings
Consumer Concerns About
Life and Current Events
Sources of Information
About the Food System
Actions Taken When Questions Arise About
Food Safety and Intensive Farming Practices
© 2012 Center for Food Integrity
Moving the Needle:
Educating Consumers on the Benefits of
Food Production Technology
Attitudinal Measurement
Experimental Design
Five Food Production
Technologies Tested
Educating Consumers on the Benefits of Raising
Animals in Indoor Production Systems
Adoption/ Diffusion of Innovations Theory
1 Out of 5 Held Positive Attitudes Before
Education
36%
Most of the eggs in the U.S. come from animals raised in indoor
production systems
22%
Raising animals in indoor production systems results in more
affordable food such as meat and eggs
22%
Indoor production systems generally produce animals more
efficiently than outdoor facilities
21%
Most of the meat in the U.S. come from animals raised in indoor
production systems
19%
Raising animals in indoor production systems results in safer food
such as meat and eggs
18%
Animals raised in indoor production systems are generally
healthier than those raised outdoors
18%
Raising animals in indoor production systems enhances their wellbeing
*Top Box ratings (8-10)
Educational Messages Believed By OneThird to One-Half
Message
Animals raised in indoor production systems are protected from
predators
Top Box
Believe*
57%
Animals raised in indoor production systems are protected from bad
weather
56
Farmers who use indoor production systems can monitor the
animals' health more closely
44
Farmers who use indoor production systems can provide specialized
nutrition to meet the animals' needs
40
Raising pigs in indoor production systems is better for the
environment because it uses fewer natural resources
35
Meat from animals raised in indoor production systems is safer
31
Animals raised in indoor production systems are protected from
diseases
31
*Top Box ratings (8-10)
Confidence in Educational Messages
Messages
Top Box
Increases
Confidence*
Food Safety Confidence
Animals raised in indoor production systems are protected from diseases
Meat from animals raised in indoor production systems is safer
34%
34
Environmental Benefits Confidence
Raising pigs in indoor production systems is better for the environment because
it uses fewer natural resources
31%
Confidence in Animal Well-Being
Animals raised in indoor production systems are protected from predators
44%
Animals raised in indoor production systems are protected from bad weather
44
Farmers who use indoor production systems can monitor the animals' health
more closely
41
Farmers who use indoor production systems can provide specialized nutrition to
meet the animals' needs
38
*Top Box ratings (8-10)
Attitudes Before and After Education
Before Education
After Education
36%
Most of the eggs in the U.S. come from animals raised
in indoor production systems
47% +11
22%
Raising animals in indoor production systems results in
more affordable food such as meat and eggs
35% +13
22%
Indoor production systems generally produce animals
more efficiently than outdoor facilities
37% +15
21%
Most of the meat in the U.S. come from animals raised in
indoor production systems
37% +16
19%
Raising animals in indoor production systems results in
safer food such as meat and eggs
33% +14
18%
Animals raised in indoor production systems are generally
healthier than those raised outdoors
33% +15
18%
Raising animals in indoor production systems enhances
their well-being
33% +15
*Top Box ratings (8-10)
Educating Consumers on the Benefits of Raising
Animals in Indoor Production Systems
Values Orientation
Most Prevalent Values Orientations
Traditionalists
Progressivists
Individualists
Collectivists
Fatalists
Socially Disoriented
36%
17%
26%
40%
49%
41%
*Based on Top Box Agreement (7-10) with
Values Orientation Statements; Groups not mutually exclusive
Collectivists and Fatalists Will Reach
Two-Thirds With High Frequency
Reach
% of
Sample
1
621
62%
2
609
3
Frequency
Values Orient. 1
Values Orient. 2
883
Collectivists
Fatalists
61
846
Traditionalists
Fatalists
606
61
901
Fatalists
Socially Disoriented
4
582
58
662
Fatalists
Progressivists
5
580
58
744
Individualists
Fatalists
6
565
57
806
Collectivists
Socially Disoriented
7
543
54
769
Traditionalists
Socially Disoriented
8
539
54
585
Socially Disoriented
Progressivists
9
525
53
751
Traditionalists
Collectivists
Target Values Orientations:
Collectivists and Fatalists
Collectivists
Fatalists
Confidence Building Messages with
Highest Reach
Top Box Increases
Confidence
Messages
Food Safety Confidence
34%
34
Animals raised in indoor production systems are protected from diseases
Meat from animals raised in indoor production systems is safer
Environmental Benefits Confidence
31%
Raising pigs in indoor production systems is better for the environment because it
uses fewer natural resources
Confidence in Animal Well-Being
44%
Animals raised in indoor production systems are protected from predators
44
Animals raised in indoor production systems are protected from bad weather
41
Farmers who use indoor production systems can monitor the animals' health more
closely
38
Farmers who use indoor production systems can provide specialized nutrition to
meet the animals' needs
Messages with Highest Frequency/Reach
Reach
% of
Sample
Freq.
1
674
67%
1586
2
673
67
1500
3
672
67
1497
4
671
67
1641
5
671
67
1612
6
670
67
1604
7
670
67
1620
8
670
67
1623
9
669
67
1508
10
669
67
1630
Message 1
Message 2
Message 3
Uses fewer natural
resources
Protects from bad
weather
Monitor animal health
more closely
Animals are safer
Uses fewer natural
resources
Protects from bad weather
Animals are safer
Uses fewer natural
resources
Protects from predators
Protects from disease
Protects from predators
Protects from bad weather
Animals are safer
Protects from bad
weather
Monitor animal health
more closely
Uses fewer natural
resources
Protects from predators
Protects from bad weather
Protects from disease
Protects from predators
Monitor animal health
more closely
Protects from disease
Protects from bad
weather
Monitor animal health
more closely
Protects from disease
Uses fewer natural
resources
Protects from predators
Animals are safer
Protects from predators
Protects from bad weather
Primary Indoor Housing Messages Should
Focus on Food Safety/Animal Well-Being
Top
Box
Raising Animals Indoors Messages
Food Safety Confidence
34%
34
Animals raised in indoor production systems are protected from diseases
Meat from animals raised in indoor production systems is safer
Environmental Benefits Confidence
31%
Raising pigs in indoor production systems is better for the environment because it
uses fewer natural resources
Confidence in Animal Well-being
44%
Animals raised in indoor production systems are protected from predators
44
Animals raised in indoor production systems are protected from bad weather
41
Farmers who use indoor production systems can monitor the animals' health more
closely
38
Farmers who use indoor production systems can provide specialized nutrition to
meet the animals' needs
Key Messages and Sources of Information
for Collectivists and Fatalists
Key Messages That Build Confidence
70%
59% 58%
60%
50%
Primary Sources of Info on
Food System Issues
57% 57%
49%
43%
2
40%
1
Websites
30%
(C-27%, F-25%)
20%
10%
Friends and Family
(C-25%, F-23%)
0%
Protects
from
Disease
Protects
from
Predators
Collectivists
Protects
from Bad
Weather
Fatalists
3
Local TV News
(C-20%, F-23%)
Key Messages and Sources of Information
for Early Adopters
Improving Early Adopters
Confidence
50%
46%
42%
40%
Primary Sources of Info on Food
System Issues
37%
1
30%
Websites (33%)
20%
10%
2
0%
Protects
from
Disease
Protects
from
Predators
Protects
from Bad
Weather
Friends and
Family (24%)
Strategy for Promoting Benefits of Raising
Animals Indoors
Most Prevalent Values
Orientations
Collectivists
Best Raising Animals Indoors
Messages to Increase Confidence
Protects
from
Disease
• Reaches Two Thirds of
Consumers
• Influences Early Adopters,
Collectivists and Fatalists
Protects
from
Predators
• Reaches Two Thirds of
Consumers
• Influences Early Adopters,
Collectivists and Fatalists
Best Sources
of Info
Websites
Friends/Family
Fatalists
Protects
from Bad
Weather
• Reaches Two Thirds of
Consumers
• Influences Early Adopters,
Collectivists and Fatalists
Local TV News
Next Steps Involve Tailoring Key
Messages to the Key Targets
Learn to Speak the
Language
Show Them Your Shared
Values
• While the overall
messages around food
safety and animal wellbeing are the same for
both target groups, the
language used to convey
these messages will be
different for Collectivists
and Fatalists. Learn to
speak their language and
you will be more likely to
connect.
• Just as the language
needed to connect with
Collectivists and Fatalists
will be different, so will
the images that draw
them into the website,
social media ad or
television ad during the
local news. Find out
which images are most
appealing and likely to
grab their attention.
Messages will only be effective if connected
first through shared values.
Indoor Housing Messaging Examples
Collectivist Message:
Research conducted by
experts from major U.S. land
grant universities has proven
that indoor housing systems
provide a better environment
that protects the well-being of
animals. Farmers across the
U.S. raise their animals indoors
to protect them from disease,
predators and bad weather.
Indoor Housing Messaging Examples
Fatalist Message:
Raising animals indoors
eliminates the worry that
animals will be affected by
disease, predators or bad
weather. Indoor housing
provides a better
environment that protects
their well-being.
Indoor Housing Messaging Examples
Collectivist
Research conducted by experts from major U.S. land grant
universities has proven that indoor housing systems provide a
better environment that protects the well-being of animals.
Farmers across the U.S. raise their animals indoors to protect
them from disease, predators and bad weather.
Fatalist
Raising animals indoors eliminates the worry that animals will
be affected by disease, predators or bad weather. Indoor
housing provides a better environment that protects their wellbeing.
Educating Consumers on the Benefits of Hormone
Use to Produce Leaner Beef
Adoption/ Diffusion of Innovations Theory
Very Few Consumers Held Positive
Attitudes Before Education
Top Box
Agree
21%
Cattle given hormones grow more muscle and less fat,
thereby producing leaner beef
21%
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) only approves
the use of hormones in beef production after rigorous
scientific review
17%
Consuming beef from cattle given hormones is safe
13%
The use of hormones in beef production is better for the
environment
*Top Box ratings (8-10)
Believability of Educational Messages
Message
Hormone use in beef cattle has been approved by the FDA
Top Box
Believe*
43%
Hormones are naturally occurring substances that are found
in all plants and animals
43
Hormones have been used in agriculture for more than 50
years
40
The use of hormones in beef cattle allows farmers to use less
land to produce the same amount of beef
32
The use of hormones in beef production helps reduce
greenhouse gas emissions
28
Hormones have been used in agriculture without any
negative effect on human health
27
*Top Box ratings (8-10)
Educational Messages
Promote Confidence
Messages
Top Box
Increases
Confidence*
Food Safety Confidence
Hormone use in beef cattle has been approved by the FDA
30%
Hormones are naturally occurring substances that are found in all
plants and animals
29
Hormones have been used in agriculture for more than 50 years
27
Hormones have been used in agriculture without any negative
effect on human health
26
Environmental Benefits Confidence
The use of hormones in beef cattle allows farmers to use less land
to produce the same amount of beef
26%
The use of hormones in beef production helps reduce greenhouse
gas emissions
25
Attitudes Before and After Education
Agree After
Educational Info
Agree Before
Educational Info
21%
Cattle given hormones grow more muscle and
less fat, thereby producing leaner beef
33% +12
21%
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) only
approves the use of hormones in beef
production after rigorous scientific review
30% +9
17%
Consuming beef from cattle given hormones is
safe
24% +7
13%
The use of hormones in beef production is
better for the environment
24% +11
*Top Box ratings (8-10)
Educating Consumers on the Benefits of Hormone
Use to Produce Leaner Beef
Values Orientation
Most Prevalent Values Orientations
Traditionalists
Progressivists
Individualists
Collectivists
Fatalists
Socially Disoriented
52%
12%
24%
50%
50%
43%
*Based on Top Box Agreement (7-10) with
Values Orientation Statements; Groups not mutually exclusive
Traditionalists and Fatalists Will Reach
Two-Thirds With High Frequency
% of Sample
Reach
Values Orient. 1
Values Orient. 2
Frequency
1
688
69%
1016
Traditionalists
Fatalists
2
679
68
1001
Collectivists
Fatalists
3
655
65
949
Traditionalists
Socially
Disoriented
4
646
65
1023
Traditionalists
Collectivists
5
641
64
934
Collectivists
Socially
Disoriented
6
627
63
927
Fatalists
Socially
Disoriented
7
602
60
743
Individualists
Collectivists
8
590
60
758
Traditionalists
Individualists
9
584
58
622
Collectivists
Progressivists
Target Values Orientations:
Traditionalists and Fatalists
Traditionalists
Fatalists
% Who Believed Message Increased Confidence in Food System
Confidence Building Messages with
Highest Reach
Top Box
Increases
Confidence
Hormone Use in Beef Messages
Food Safety Confidence
30%
Hormone use in beef cattle has been approved by the FDA
29
Hormones are naturally occurring substances that are found in all
plants and animals
27
Hormones have been used in agriculture for more than 50 years
26
Hormones have been used in agriculture without any negative effect
on human health
Environmental Benefits Confidence
26%
25
The use of hormones in beef cattle allows farmers to use less land to
produce the same amount of beef
The use of hormones in beef production helps reduce greenhouse
gas emissions
Messages with Highest Frequency/Reach
Reach
% of
Sample
Freq.
Message 1
Message 2
Message 3
1
539
54%
1213
Approved by FDA
Hormones naturally
occurring
Less land to produce beef
2
533
53
1198
Approved by FDA
Hormones naturally
occurring
Reduces greenhouse gas
emissions
3
525
52
1214
Approved by FDA
Hormones naturally
occurring
No negative human health
effect
4
525
52
1183
Hormones naturally
occurring
No negative human
health effect
Less land to produce beef
5
523
52
1218
Approved by FDA
Hormones naturally
occurring
Used for more than 50 years
6
520
52
1168
Hormones naturally
occurring
No negative human
health effect
Reduces greenhouse gas
emissions
7
519
52
1187
Hormones naturally
occurring
Used for more than 50
years
Less land to produce beef
8
517
52
1184
Approved by FDA
No negative human
health effect
Less land to produce beef
9
516
52
1188
Approved by FDA
Used for more than 50
years
Less land to produce beef
10
516
52
1172
Hormones naturally
occurring
Used for more than 50
years
Reduces greenhouse gas
emissions
% Who Believed Message Increased Confidence in Food System
Primary Messages Should Focus on Food
Safety/Environmental Benefits
Top Box
Hormone Use in Beef Messages
Food Safety Confidence
30%
Hormone use in beef cattle has been approved by the FDA
29
Hormones are naturally occurring substances that are found in all
plants and animals
27
Hormones have been used in agriculture for more than 50 years
26
Hormones have been used in agriculture without any negative effect
on human health
Environmental Benefits Confidence
26%
25
The use of hormones in beef cattle allows farmers to use less land to
produce the same amount of beef
The use of hormones in beef production helps reduce greenhouse
gas emissions
Key Messages and Sources of Information for
Traditionalists and Fatalists
40%
Key Messages That Build
Confidence
35%
30%
28%
Primary Sources of Info on
Food System Issues
35%
32%
30%
27%
2
1
20%
Websites
(T-28%, F-26%)
10%
Friends and Family
(T-26%, F-24%)
0%
Approved by FDA
Hormones
naturally occurring
Traditionalists
Less land to
produce beef
Fatalists
3
Local TV News
(T-19%, F-21%)
Key Messages and Sources of Information
for Early Adopters
Improving Early Adopters
Confidence
Primary Sources of Info on Food
System Issues
40%
30%
30%
30%
28%
1
Websites (33%)
20%
10%
2
0%
Approved by FDA
Hormones
naturally
occurring
Less land to
produce beef
Friends and
Family (24%)
Strategy for Promoting Benefits of Using
Hormones to Produce Leaner Beef
Most Prevalent Values
Orientations
Best Beef Hormone Messages to
Increase Confidence
Approval
by FDA
Traditionalists
Hormones
Naturally
Occurring
Reaches More than 2 out 3
Consumers
Influences Early Adopters,
Traditionalists and Fatalists
Best Sources
of Info
Websites
Reaches More than 2 out 3
Consumers
Influences Early Adopters,
Traditionalists and Fatalists
Friends/Family
Fatalists
Less Land
to Produce
Beef
Reaches More than 2 out 3
Consumers
Influences Early Adopters,
Traditionalists and Fatalists
Local TV News
Next Steps Involve Tailoring Key
Messages to the Key Targets
Learn to Speak the Language
While the overall Food
Safety and Environmental
Benefits messages are the
same for both target
groups, the language used
to convey these messages
will be different for
Traditionalists and Fatalists.
Learn to speak their
language and you will be
more likely to connect.
Show Them Your Shared
Values
Just as the language
needed to connect with
Traditionalists and Fatalists
will be different, so will the
images that draw them into
the website, social media
ad or television ad during
the local news. Find out
which images are most
appealing and likely to
grab their attention.
Hormone Messaging Examples
Traditionalist:
Hormones have been used to raise beef cattle for more than
50 years. Approved by the Food and Drug Administration after
thorough review, hormones are a naturally occurring
substance that helps farmers produce leaner beef while using
fewer acres of grain, which is better for our environment.
Educating Consumers on the Benefits of
Antibiotics Use in Meat-Producing Animals
Adoption/ Diffusion of Innovations Theory
Top Box
Agree
1 Out of 4 Held Positive Attitudes
Before Education
27%
Antibiotics are beneficial for treating illness in meatproducing animals
21%
Antibiotics are beneficial for protecting the health of
meat-producing animals
21%
Meat from animals treated properly with antibiotics is
safe to eat
15%
Meat from animals treated properly with antibiotics is
free from antibiotic residue
*Top Box ratings (8-10)
Educational Messages Are Believed By
More Than One-Third
Message
Must be approved by the FDA through rigorous testing
Top Box
Believe*
40%
Decreasing the use of resulted in increased disease in the swine herd in
Denmark
37
Most scientists agree that antibiotic resistance in humans is related to
human antibiotic use
37
Only antibiotics determined to be safe by the FDA used can be used to
treat sick animals
37
Strict withdrawal periods must be followed
36
Only antibiotics determined to be safe by the FDA can be used to protect
the health of meat-producing animals
35
The USDA ensures antibiotic withdrawal periods are followed
30
According to the FDA, there is no direct link between antibiotic use in
animals and drug-resistant human diseases
30
*Top Box ratings (8-10)
Educational Messages Promote
Confidence in a Third of Consumers
Messages
Top Box
Food Safety Confidence
Must be approved by the FDA through rigorous testing
35%
Only antibiotics determined to be safe by the FDA can be used to treat sick
animals
35
Only antibiotics determined to be safe by the FDA can be used to protect the
health of meat-producing animals
35
Strict withdrawal periods must be followed
34
The USDA monitors ensures antibiotic withdrawal periods are followed
32
Most scientists agree that antibiotic resistance in humans is related to human
antibiotic use
31
According to the FDA, there is no direct link between antibiotic use in animals
and drug-resistant human diseases
30
Decreasing the use resulted in increased disease in the swine herd in Denmark
29
*Top Box ratings (8-10)
Attitudes Before and After Education
Agree After
Educational Info
Agree Before
Educational Info
27%
Antibiotics are beneficial for treating illness
in meat-producing animals
37% +10
21%
Antibiotics are beneficial for protecting the
health of meat-producing animals
35% +14
21%
Meat from animals treated properly with
antibiotics is safe to eat
32% +11
15%
Meat from animals treated properly with
antibiotics is free from antibiotic residue
26%
*Top Box ratings (8-10)
+11
Educating Consumers on the Benefits of
Antibiotics Use in Meat-Producing Animals
Values Orientation
Most Prevalent Values Orientations
For Antibiotics Use
Traditionalists
Progressivists
Individualists
Collectivists
Fatalists
Socially Disoriented
41%
16%
25%
50%
51%
45%
*Based on Top Box Agreement (7-10) with
Values Orientation Statements; Groups not mutually exclusive
Collectivists and Fatalists Will Reach
Two-Thirds With High Frequency
Reach
% of
Sample
Values Orient. 1
Values Orient. 2
Frequency
1
690
69%
1005
Collectivists
Fatalists
2
640
64
964
Fatalists
Socially Disoriented
3
641
64
919
Traditionalists
Fatalists
4
631
63
949
Collectivists
Socially Disoriented
5
597
60
783
Traditionalists
Socially Disoriented
6
596
60
665
Fatalists
Progressivists
7
593
59
650
Collectivists
Progressivists
8
592
59
740
Individualists
Collectivists
9
589
59
904
Traditionalists
Collectivists
10
576
58
755
Individualists
Fatalists
Target Values Orientations:
Collectivists and Fatalists
Collectivists
Fatalists
Confidence Building Messages With
Highest Reach
% Who Believed Message Increased Confidence in Food System
Top Box
Increases
Confidence
Messages
Food Safety Confidence
35%
Must be approved by the FDA through rigorous testing
35
Only antibiotics determined to be safe by the FDA can be used to treat sick
animals
35
Only antibiotics determined to be safe by the FDA can be used to protect the
health of meat-producing animals
34
Strict withdrawal periods must be followed
32
The USDA monitors ensures antibiotic withdrawal periods are followed
31
Most scientists agree that antibiotic resistance in humans is related to human
antibiotic use
30
According to the FDA, there is no direct link between antibiotic use in animals
and drug-resistant human diseases
29
Decreasing the use resulted in increased disease in the swine herd in Denmark
Messages With High Frequency/Reach
Reach
1
2
604
603
% of
Sample
60%
60
Freq.
Message 1
Message 2
Message 3
Rigorous testing by FDA
Scientists agree
resistance is from human
antibiotics
Dec. use of antibiotics in
Denmark=inc. swine disease
Rigorous testing by FDA
Scientists agree
resistance is from human
antibiotics
Strict withdrawal periods
followed
Rigorous testing by FDA
FDA determines safe to
treat animal illness
Scientists agree resistance is
from human antibiotics
Rigorous testing by FDA
No link to human drugresistant disease
Strict withdrawal periods
followed
Rigorous testing by FDA
FDA determines safe to
protect animal health
Scientists agree resistance is
from human antibiotics
Rigorous testing by FDA
Strict withdrawal periods
followed
Dec. use of antibiotics in
Denmark=inc. swine disease
Rigorous testing by FDA
No link to human drugresistant disease
Scientists agree resistance is
from human antibiotics
Rigorous testing by FDA
Scientists agree
resistance is from human
antibiotics
USDA ensures withdrawal
periods followed
Scientists agree resistance
is from human antibiotics
Strict withdrawal periods
followed
Dec. use of antibiotics in
Denmark=inc. swine disease
Rigorous testing by FDA
FDA determines safe to
protect animal health
Dec. use of antibiotics in
Denmark=inc. swine disease
1351
1413
3
602
60
1417
4
601
60
1403
5
600
60
1414
6
600
60
1389
7
596
60
1365
8
596
60
1396
9
596
60
1334
10
595
60
1390
Primary Antibiotics Use Messages
% Who Believed Message Increased Confidence in Food System
Antibiotic Use in Meat-Producing Animals Messages
Food Safety Confidence
35%
Must be approved by the FDA through rigorous testing
35
Only antibiotics determined to be safe by the FDA can be used to treat sick
animals
35
Only antibiotics determined to be safe by the FDA can be used to protect
the health of meat-producing animals
34
Strict withdrawal periods must be followed
32
The USDA monitors ensures antibiotic withdrawal periods are followed
31
Most scientists agree that antibiotic resistance in humans is related to
human antibiotic use
30
According to the FDA, there is no direct link between antibiotic use in
animals and drug-resistant human diseases
29
Decreasing the use resulted in increased disease in the swine herd in
Denmark
Key Messages and Sources of Information for
Collectivists and Fatalists
50%
46%
46%
44%
43%
43%
43%
40%
Primary Sources of Info on Food
System Issues
Key Messages
44%
43%
40%
39%
1
2
Websites
(C 26%, F-25%)
3
30%
Rigorous Scientists FDA Deter. FDA Deter.
Strict
Testing by
Agree
Safe to
Safe to Withdrawal
FDA
Resistance
Treat
Protect
Periods
from
Animals
Animals
Followed
Human
Antibiotics
Collectivists
Fatalists
Local TV News
(C-23%, F 24%)
Friends and Family
(C-23%, F-23%)
Messages With High Frequency/Reach for
Early Adopters
Primary Sources of Info on
Food System Issues
Improving Early Adopters
Confidence
40%
36%
36%
36%
37%
32%
1
30%
20%
Websites (33%)
2
10%
0%
Rigorous Scientists FDA Deter. FDA Deter.
Strict
Testing by
Agree
Safe to
Safe to Withdrawal
FDA
Resistance
Treat
Protect
Periods
from
Animals
Animals Followed
Human
Antibiotics
Friends and
Family (24%)
Strategy for Promoting Benefits of
Antibiotic Use in Meat-Producing Animals
Most Prevalent Values
Orientations
Collectivists
Best Antibiotic Use Messages to
Increase Confidence
Rigorous Testing
by FDA
Reaches Over Half of Consumers
Influences Early Adopters, Collectivists
and Fatalists
FDA Determines
Safe to Treat Ill
Animals
Reaches Over Half of Consumers
Influences Early Adopters, Collectivists
and Fatalists
FDA Determines
Safe to Protect
Animals
Reaches Over Half of Consumers
Influences Early Adopters, Collectivists
and Fatalists
Best Sources
of Info
Websites
Local TV News
Fatalists
Scientists Agree
Resistance from
Human Antibiotics
Reaches Over Half of Consumers
Influences Early Adopters, Collectivists
and Fatalists
Strict Withdrawal
Periods Followed
Reaches Over Half of Consumers
Influences Early Adopters, Collectivists
and Fatalists
Friends/Family
Next Steps Involve Tailoring Key
Messages to the Key Targets
Learn to Speak the Language
While the overall messages
around the FDA role,
withdrawal periods and
scientists dispelling
resistance myths are the
same for both target groups,
the language used to convey
these messages will be
different for Collectivists and
Fatalists. Learn to speak their
language and you will be
more likely to connect.
Show Them Your Shared
Values
Just as the language
needed to connect with
Collectivists and Fatalists
will be different, so will the
images that draw them into
the website, social media
ad or television ad during
the local news. Find out
which images are most
appealing and likely to
grab their attention.
Use of Antibiotic Messaging Examples
Collectivists:
Rigorous evaluation by the
U.S. Food and Drug
Administration has shown the
responsible use of antibiotics
in farm animals provides
consumers with safe,
wholesome meat. The U.S.
Department of Agriculture
requires all farmers to follow
strict withdrawal periods
before sending their animals
to market.
Use of Antibiotic Messaging Examples
Fatalists:
There is no need to worry about
antibiotic resistance caused by
eating meat. The meat from
animals treated properly with
antibiotics is safe to eat. In fact,
the U.S. Department of
Agriculture requires all farmers
to follow strict withdrawal
periods before sending their
animals to market.
Use of Antibiotic Messaging Examples
Collectivists:
Rigorous evaluation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
has shown the responsible use of antibiotics in farm animals
provides consumers with safe, wholesome meat. The U.S.
Department of Agriculture requires all farmers to follow strict
withdrawal periods before sending their animals to market.
Fatalists:
There is no need to worry about antibiotic resistance caused by
eating meat. The meat from animals treated properly with
antibiotics is safe to eat. In fact, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture requires all farmers to follow strict withdrawal periods
before sending their animals to market.
Education on Food System Issues
Moves the Needle
+10 to +15 pts.
+7 to +11 pts.
+11 to +16 pts.
+10 to +14 pts.
+6 to +8 pts.
To download a copy of the 2012 Consumer Research
Summary go to
www.foodintegrity.org
If you have questions about information related to the
2012 Consumer Trust Research, please contact
[email protected]
OR
[email protected]
© 2012 Center for Food Integrity
This information is wholly owned by the Foundation for Food Integrity and licensed to CFI; Study was conducted by Gestalt Inc.