Part I RisksRisks
6.6 The need for more intensive cooperation between natural and social scientists
6.5 Application of combined consumer behaviour ± food
And, of course, if we wish to know more about the specific behaviour of different consumers, we also need to know more about the specific psychological attitudes, beliefs and values of these consumers. In other words, the outcomes of the risk predictions developed by microbiologists should be communicated to the target group of consumers in a way that fits the values and motivation of that target group.
These requirements can be met only when knowledge from different disciplines is combined. To assess and predict the specific food safety risks, food safety experts and, in the case of microbial hygiene food, microbiologists are needed. To be able to predict consumer behaviour based on attitudes, values and beliefs of specific groups, and to develop targeted information strategies, consumer psychologists play an important role. Subsequently, the impact of risk communication on consumer health must be assessed by food microbiologists.
This implies close cooperation between consumer psychologists and micro-biologists specifically, or social and natural scientists more generally.
Before illustrating these ideas by a current research initiative, we would like to mention that cooperation requires effort from all researchers involved and is therefore not a simple thing to accomplish. A precondition for cooperation is that researchers from both social science disciplines and natural sciences are willing to cooperate with each other. This implies a willingness to accept the research paradigms and methods used in the different disciplines, and requires effort to avoid jargon and communicate in a way that can be understood by the partners.
Ongoing research is currently developing these ideas further (Fischer et al., 2005). The research combines contemporary insights from both risk perception and communication theories directed towards reducing risky behaviours. It is argued that three elements should be addressed from a psychological point of view if people are to adopt healthy domestic food hygiene practices following risk communication. Due account must be taken of the following psychological factors:
· the resistance against attitudes change invoked by optimistic bias;
· the limitations in motivation and mental capacity of consumers in processing information; and
· the observation that information processing by consumers follows an experiential and affect-driven solving strategy rather than one of formal logic.
Taking these psychological factors into account the next question is: how do consumer perceptions and attitudes relate to actual risks resulting from inappro-priate consumer behaviours? At this stage, it is important to analyse the technical risks associated with specific domestic food hygiene practices across different consumer groups. Therefore behavioural observations and micro-biological research into finished meals will be combined. The outcome of this study, analysed by adopting a microbiological approach developed from HACCP might provide the necessary inputs to design a quantitative mathe-matical risk assessment (QMRA) (see Nauta, 2002). This QMRA might then be Consumer perceptions of risks from food 113
able to generate the necessary information that can be used to develop a targeted communication strategy.
By taking due account of the attitude change theories with regard to dual-processing of information, it should be possible to understand what cues associated with different messages will motivate consumers to read and process the risk information. For example, it may be possible to enhance information processing by using emotions or affective factors.
Finally, in the case of consumer-based food safety objectives it is important to validate the impact of changed consumer behaviour on microbial contami-nation, by conducting additional microbiological measurements, implying further cooperation between the natural and social sciences.
So, for a comprehensive understanding of the effects of consumer behaviour with regard to hygiene-related food safety practices and to understand the effectiveness of information interventions aimed at those consumers and the subsequent changes in behaviour, a close cooperation between natural and social scientists is required.
6.6.1 Implications beyond consumers
Up to this point the discussion in this chapter has focused on the consumer. In part, this is because most research into human behaviour and food safety has had the same focus. This may be because consumer behaviour is the only part of the food chain that cannot be enforced to comply with food safety standards. Thus understanding consumer behaviour, and developing interventions to reduce risky practices, may be the only way to improve public health associated with food safety. However, it is likely that professional workers in the food industry (for example, in the catering sector) are bound by the same psychological factors as consumers. After all, workers, as highly skilled as they may be, are humans like all of us. Thus the provision to workers in the catering sector with a large and possibly complicated safety manual will not guarantee that the rules and guidelines contained in the manual are followed. Food industry and catering workers not only have to follow these rules, but they also have to comply to the production standards set by their employer and regulatory bodies.
If the company has a good safety policy, this might go a long way in generating an adequate level of worker motivation towards compliance.
However, if the regulations are too complex, or inappropriately presented or described, their correct implementation might lie beyond the cognitive capabilities of the employees involved in food preparation, especially in a stressful or time-limited situation (Wickens and Hollands, 2000). This might be the case especially for the hotel and catering industry, which is often under considerable time pressure and in which the staff often lacks formal training.
In the manufacturing industry in general (for example, within the field of modern aviation) a lot of effort is spent on `human factors': interfaces and procedures are specifically designed to accommodate the operator's cognitive potential even in situations of extreme stress, in order to prevent the potentially 114 Handbook of hygiene control in the food industry
catastrophic results of human error in these industries. These efforts were undertaken after the occurrence of some serious safety incidents, and resulted from the need to protect both the public and the employee.
Similar insights relating to equipment operation and procedure design have, to our knowledge, not been extended to the food industry, whether food processing plants or to catering and hotel businesses. Arguably, the applicable safety standards in the food industry that are constructed without taking human factors into account are unlikely to result in optimal levels of safety for employees and consumers. Some of the approaches, procedures and information interventions adopted in the human factors literature generally, and consumer risk psychology literature specifically, may be usefully applied to improve safety in the food production and catering sectors.