References
- Cacioppo, John, and Richard Petty. 1982. “The Need of Cognition.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 42 (1):116–31. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116.
- Cardello, A. V. 2003. “Consumer Concerns and Expectations about Novel Food Processing Technologies: Effects on Product Liking.” Appetite 40 (3):217–33. doi: 10.1016/S0195-6663(03)00008-4.
- Chan, Chingching. 2011. “Feeling Ambivalent about Going Green.” Journal of Advertising 40:19–32.
- Clarke, Belinda. 2003. “Report: Farmers and Scientists.” Science Communication 25 (2):198–203. doi: 10.1177/1075547003259450.
- Federico, Giovanni. 2005. Feeding the World: An Economic History of Agriculture, 1800–2000. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- Fischhoff, Baruch, Paul Slovic, Sarah Lichtenstein, Stephen Read, and Barbara Combs. 1978. “How Safe is Safe Enough? A Psychometric Study of Attitudes towards Technological Risks and Benefits.” Policy Sciences 9 (2):127–52. doi: 10.1007/BF00143739.
- Gaskell, George, Nick Allum, Wolfgang Wagner, Nicole Kronberger, Helge Torgersen, Juergen Hampel, and Julie Bardes. 2004. “GM Foods and the Misperception of Risk Perception.” Risk Analysis 24 (1):185–94.
- Guehlstorf, Nicholas. 2008. “Understanding the Scope of Farmer Perceptions of Risk: Considering Farmer Opinions on the Use of Genetically Modified (GM) Crops as a Stakeholder Voice in Policy.” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 21 (6):541–58. doi: 10.1007/s10806-008-9116-7.
- Hall, Clare, and Dominic Moran. 2006. “Investigating GM Risk Perceptions: A Survey of Anti GM and Environmental Campaign Group Members.” Journal of Rural Studies 22 (1):29–37. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2005.05.010.
- Holmgreen, Lise-Lotte. 2008. “Biotech as ‘Biothreat’?: Metaphorical Constructions in Discourse.” Discourse & Society 19:99–119. doi: 10.1177/0957926507083691.
- Howard, Philip. 2009. “Visualizing Consolidation in the Global Seed Industry: 1996–2008.” Sustainability 1 (4):1266–87. doi: 10.3390/su1041266.
- Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
- Landau, Mark, Lucas Keefer, and Zachary Rothschild. 2014. “Epistemic Motives Moderate the Effect of Metaphoric Framing on Attitudes.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 53:125–38. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2014.03.009.
- Landau, Mark, Brian Meier, and Lucas Keefer. 2010. “A Metaphor-Enriched Social Cognition.” Psychological Bulletin 136 (6): 1045–1067.
- Leigh, James. 1994. “The Use of Figures of Speech in Print Ad Headlines.” Journal of Advertising 23 (2):17–33.
- Liakopoulos, Miltos. 2002. “Pandora’s Box or Panacea? Using Metaphors to Create the Public Representations of Biotechnology.” Public Understanding of Science 11 (1):5–32. doi: 10.1088/0963-6625/11/1/301.
- Liaukonyte, Jura, Nadia Streletskaya, Harry Kaiser, and Bradley Rickard. 2013. “Consumer Response to ‘Contains’ and ‘Free Of’ Labeling: Evidence from Lab Experiments.” Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 35 (3):476–507. doi: 10.1093/aepp/ppt015.
- Marris, Claire. 2001. “Public Views on GMOs: Deconstructing the Myths.” EMBO Reports 2 (7):545–8. doi: 10.1093/embo-reports/kve142.
- McQuarrie, Edward, and Barbara Phillips. 2005. “Indirect Persuasion in Advertising: How Consumers Process Metaphors Presented in Pictures and Words.” Journal of Advertising 34 (2):7–20. doi: 10.1080/00913367.2005.10639188.
- McQuarrie, Edward, and David Mick. 1999. “Visual Rhetoric on Advertising: Text Interpretive, Experimental, and Reader-Response Analyses.” Journal of Consumer Research 26 (1):37–54. doi: 10.1086/209549.
- Pollio, Howard, Michael Smith, and Marilyn Pollio. 1990. “Figurative Language and Cognitive Psychology.” Language and Cognitive Processes 5 (2):141–67. doi: 10.1080/01690969008402102.
- Shutova, Ekaterina, Barry Devereux, and Anna Korhonen. 2013. “Conceptual Metaphor Theory Meets the Data: A Corpus-Based Human Annotation Study.” Language Resources and Evaluation 47 (4):1261–84. doi: 10.1007/s10579-013-9238-z.
- Sinclair, Janas, and Tracy Irani. 2005. “Advertising Advocacy for Biotechnology: The Effect of Public Accountability on Corporate Trust and Attitude toward the Ad.” Journal of Advertising 34 (3):59–73. doi: 10.1080/00913367.2005.10639203.
- Steinberg, James. 1998. “Controversial Products Helped by Packaging.” Brandweek 39:20.
- Todorov, Tzvetan. 1982. Theories of the Symbol. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
- Toncar, Mark, and James Munch. 2001. “Consumer Responses to Tropes in Print Advertising.” Journal of Advertising 30 (1):55–65. doi: 10.1080/00913367.2001.10673631.
- Ueland, Ø., H. Gunnlaugsdottir, F. Holm, N. Kalogeras, O. Leino, J. M. Luteijn, S. H. Magnússon, et al. 2012. “State of the Art in Benefit-Risk Analysis: Consumer Perception.” Food and Chemical Toxicology 50 (1):67–76., doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2011.06.006.
- USC Canada. 2012. On Canadian Seed Security: Environmental Scan. Ottawa: The Bauta Family Initiative.
- USDA. 2019. “Agricultural Biotechnology Glossary.” https://www.usda.gov/topics/biotechnology/biotechnology-glossary doi: 10.1525/bisi.1999.49.6.438.
- Verbeke, Wim, Isabelle Sioen, Karen Brunsø, Stefan De Henauw, and John Van Camp. 2007. “Consumer Perception versus Scientific Evidence of Farmed and Wild Fish: Exploratory Insights from Belgium.” Aquaculture International 15 (2):121–36. doi: 10.1007/s10499-007-9072-7.
- Ward, James, and William Gaidis. 1990. “Metaphor in Promotional Communication: A Review of Research on Metaphor Comprehension and Quality.” Advances in Consumer Research 17:636.
- Wheeler, SarahAnn. 2008. “The Barriers to Further Adoption of Organic Farming and Genetic Engineering in Australia: Views of Agricultural Professionals and Their Information Sources.” Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 23 (2):161–70. doi: 10.1017/S1742170507002128.
- Wilkie, Adam, and Lois Wright Morton. 2015. “Climatologists’ Communication of Climate Science to the Agricultural Sector.” Science Communication 37:371–95. doi: 10.1177/1075547015581927.
- Zaltman, Gerald, and Robin Coulter. 1995. “Seeing the Voice of the Customer: Metaphor-Based Advertising Research.” Journal of Advertising Research 35:35–51.