Consumer adoption of personalised nutrition services from the perspective of a risk–benefit trade-off

28Citations
Citations of this article
67Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Through a Privacy Calculus (i.e. risk–benefit trade-off) lens, this study identifies factors that contribute to consumers’ adoption of personalised nutrition services. We argue that consumers’ intention to adopt personalised nutrition services is determined by perceptions of Privacy Risk, Personalisation Benefit, Information Control, Information Intrusiveness, Service Effectiveness, and the Benevolence, Integrity, and Ability of a service provider. Data were collected in eight European countries using an online survey. Results confirmed a robust and Europe-wide applicable cognitive model, showing that consumers’ intention to adopt personalised nutrition services depends more on Perceived Personalisation Benefit than on Perceived Privacy Risk. Perceived Privacy Risk was mainly determined by perceptions of Information Control, whereas Perceived Personalisation Benefit primarily depended on Perceived Service Effectiveness. Services that required increasingly intimate personal information, and in particular DNA, raised consumers’ Privacy Risk perceptions, but failed to increase perceptions of Personalisation Benefit. Accordingly, to successfully exploit personalised nutrition, service providers should convey a clear message regarding the benefits and effectiveness of personalised nutrition services. Furthermore, service providers may reduce Privacy Risk by increasing consumer perceptions of Information Control. To enhance perceptions of both Information Control and Service Effectiveness, service providers should make sure that consumers perceive them as competent and reliable.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Berezowska, A., Fischer, A. R. H., Ronteltap, A., van der Lans, I. A., & van Trijp, H. C. M. (2015). Consumer adoption of personalised nutrition services from the perspective of a risk–benefit trade-off. Genes and Nutrition, 10(6). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12263-015-0478-y

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free