Impact of media negative coverage of honey consumption expectations

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2020.12.20

Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis ›› 2020, Vol. 32 ›› Issue (12): 2282-2290.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2020.12.20

• Agricultural Economy and Development • Previous Articles Next Articles

Impact of media negative coverage of honey consumption expectations

LI Menglu¹(), ZHANG Shemei¹^,²^,^*()

1. School of Management, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu 611130, China
2. Sichuan Rural Development Research Center, Chengdu 611130, China

Received:2020-03-23 Online:2020-12-25 Published:2020-12-25
Contact: ZHANG Shemei

Abstract

Abstract:

The media negative coverage, especially on the quality and safety of agricultural products, had a great impact on the agricultural product market, which not only brings psychological panic to consumers, but also seriously affects consumers’ purchase decisions. In the end of 2018, a famous hospital questioned the effect of honey on their wechat official account had aroused heated debate. To explore the impact of negative coverage on the consumption of honey, the paper adopted the method of questionnaire and statistical analysis. Based on the data of 1 222 questionnaires in 6 cities in the country, the Ologit model was used to study the coverage and subsequent disputes on consumers. At the same time, the propensity score matching (PSM) and TSLS were used to deal with the selective bias. The results showed that impact of media negative coverage, last purchase behavior and consumer confidence were the important factors influencing the change of consumption expectation, and the negative coverage had a significant impact on consumption expectation. Therefore, this paper suggested that the establishment of authoritative institutions should establish speech appraisal and control system, and strengthen the crisis management of negative coverage to guide rational consumer behavior.

Key words: consumer expectation, media negative coverage, consumer trust, Ologit model, propensity score matching

CLC Number:

S-9
F426.82

LI Menglu, ZHANG Shemei. Impact of media negative coverage of honey consumption expectations[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2020, 32(12): 2282-2290.

Figures/Tables 8

References 9

[1]	李瑞珍, 刘世丽, 刘朋飞, 等. 蜂蜜“柠檬市场”问题的经济学分析[J]. 中国蜂业, 2018,69(3):66-69.
	LI R Z, LIU S L, LIU P F, et al. Economic analysis of honey “lemon market” problem[J]. Apiculture of China, 2018,69(3):66-69. (in Chinese)
[2]	裴高璞, 史波林, 赵镭, 等. 蜂蜜质量市场动态及掺假检测方法现状分析[J]. 食品科学, 2013,34(15):329-336. DOI URL
	PEI G P, SHI B L, ZHAO L, et al. Current situation analysis of quality market dynamics and detection methods for honey adulteration[J]. Food Science, 2013,34(15):329-336.(in Chinese with English abstract) DOI URL
[3]	章家清, 朱俊波. 我国蜂蜜产业中的信息障碍研究[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2008,36(8):3439-3440.
	ZHANG J Q, ZHU J B. Analysis on incomplete information of honey industry in China[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2008,36(8):3439-3440.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[4]	相光明, 蒋慧冷, 佳蔚, 等. 蜂蜜全产业链质量安全控制探讨[J]. 中国蜂业, 2018,69(9):58-61.
	XIANG G M, JIANG H L, JIA W, et al. Quality and safety control of honey industry chain[J]. Apiculture of China, 2018,69(9):58-61.(in Chinese)
[5]	徐国钧, 李建琴, 刘浩天. 消费者网购蜂蜜意愿的影响因素研究: 基于问卷调查的实证分析[J]. 中国蜂业, 2018,69(4):63-68.
	XU G J, LI J Q, LIU H T. A study on influencing factors of consumers’ online shopping intensions of honey: empirical analysis based on questionnaire surveys[J]. Apiculture of China, 2018,69(4):63-68.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[6]	唐娜, 章家清. 基于AHP的蜂蜜产品消费选择影响因素分析[J]. 经济论坛, 2013(10):130-134.
	TANG N, ZHANG J Q. Analysis of influencing factors of honey product consumption selection based on AHP[J]. Economic Forum, 2013(10):130-134.(in Chinese)
[7]	李飞, 马宝龙, 林健. 突发事件对零售企业顾客购买行为的影响研究[J]. 南开管理评论, 2010,13(3):4-11.
	LI F, MA B L, LIN J. The effects of emergencies on consumer purchase behavior in retailing[J]. Nankai Business Review, 2010,13(3):4-11.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[8]	刘双, 祁春节. 对柑橘大实蝇短信事件中消费心理与消费行为的实证研究[J]. 华中农业大学学报(社会科学版), 2009(4):14-17.
	LIU S, QI C J. Empirical study on mobile phone message incident about Citrus bactrocera minax, consumer psychology and consumer behavior[J]. Journal of Huazhong Agricultural University (Social Science Edition), 2009(4):14-17.(in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]	温忠麟, 叶宝娟. 中介效应分析: 方法和模型发展[J]. 心理科学进展, 2014,22(5):731-745.
	WEN Z L, YE B J. Analyses of mediating effects: the development of methods and models[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2014,22(5):731-745.(in Chinese with English abstract)

城市 City	样本数量 Sample size	比例 Proportion/%
北京 Beijing	368	30.11
上海 Shanghai	400	32.73
武汉 Wuhan	178	14.57
郑州 Zhengzhou	99	8.10
成都 Chengdu	104	8.51
西安 Xi’an	73	5.97

城市 City	样本数量 Sample size	比例 Proportion/%
北京 Beijing	368	30.11
上海 Shanghai	400	32.73
武汉 Wuhan	178	14.57
郑州 Zhengzhou	99	8.10
成都 Chengdu	104	8.51
西安 Xi’an	73	5.97

城市 city	听说该事件Have heard/%			未听说该事件Haven’t heard/%
城市 city	增加 Increase	减少 Decrease	不变 Unchanged	增加 Increase	减少 Decrease	不变 Unchanged
北京 Beijing	43.45	6.90	49.66	23.32	7.62	69.06
上海 Shanghai	34.36	6.75	58.90	16.88	8.86	74.26
武汉 Wuhan	46.77	8.06	45.16	31.90	4.31	63.79
郑州 Zhengzhou	57.45	2.13	40.43	40.38	5.77	53.85
西安 Xi’an	57.69	11.5	30.77	19.15	6.38	74.47
成都 Chengdu	47.06	17.65	35.29	32.86	7.14	60.00
平均 Average	47.80	8.84	43.37	27.41	6.68	65.90

城市 city	听说该事件Have heard/%			未听说该事件Haven’t heard/%
城市 city	增加 Increase	减少 Decrease	不变 Unchanged	增加 Increase	减少 Decrease	不变 Unchanged
北京 Beijing	43.45	6.90	49.66	23.32	7.62	69.06
上海 Shanghai	34.36	6.75	58.90	16.88	8.86	74.26
武汉 Wuhan	46.77	8.06	45.16	31.90	4.31	63.79
郑州 Zhengzhou	57.45	2.13	40.43	40.38	5.77	53.85
西安 Xi’an	57.69	11.5	30.77	19.15	6.38	74.47
成都 Chengdu	47.06	17.65	35.29	32.86	7.14	60.00
平均 Average	47.80	8.84	43.37	27.41	6.68	65.90

变量类别 Variable type	变量 Variable	符号 Symbol	定义及说明 Variable annotation	期望值 Expectation	标准差 SD
被解释变量 Explained variable	2019年蜂蜜消费变化 Changes in honey consumption in 2019	Y	减少购买=1;购买量不变=2;增加购买=3 Decrease=1; Unchanged=2; Increase=3	2.244	0.576
媒体负面报道的影响	事件认知 Event cognition	X₁	不知道该事件=0;知道该事件=1 Unknown=0;Known=1	0.390	0.488
Impact of media negative coverage	事件看法 Views on events	X₂	支持蜂蜜有害=-1;支持中立观点=0; 支持蜂蜜有益观点=1 Support harmful view=1;Support neutral view=0; Support beneficial view=1	0.509	0.589
消费认知 Confidence	蜂蜜质量提升信心 Confidence about honey quality	X₃	认为质量不会提升=1;中立=2;认为质量会提升=3; Negative view=1;Neutral view=2;Positive view=3	0.457	0.498
	蜂产业发展预测 Forecast of bee industry development	X₄	产业萎缩=1;产业发展受阻碍=2;产业缓慢发展=3; 产业高速发展=4 Industry shrinkage=1;Development hindered=2; Slow development=3;Rapid development=4	3.158	0.629
消费者上期购买行为特征 Previous consumption	上期购买次数 Previous frequency	X₅	被调查者2017—2018年内实际购买蜂蜜次数 Actual purchase times of honey by respondents in 2017—2018	2.173	0.755
	上期购买费用 Previous cost/元 Yuan	X₆	≤100=1;100~300=2;300~500=3;500~1 000=4; 1 000~2 000=5;≥2 000=6	2.320	1.076
	上期质量满意度 Previous satisfaction	X₇	不满意=1;中立=2;满意=3 Dissatisfied=1;Neutral=2;Satisfied=3	2.031	0.711
个人特征 Personal characteristic	性别 Gender	X₈	男=0;女=1 Man=0;Woman=1	0.493	0.500
	年龄 Age	X₉	≤19=1;20~29=2;30~39=3;40~49=4; 50~59=5;≥60=6	2.592	0.917
	受教育年限 Education	X₁₀	年 Year	15.492	2.899
	月收入 Monthly income	X₁₁	≤2 000=1;2 000~5 000=2;5 000~8 000=3; 8 000~10 000=4;≥10 000=5	3.140	1.288
	未来收入变化 Changes in income	X₁₂	明显下降=1;缓慢下降=2;基本不变=3;缓慢增长=4; 较快增长=5 Significant decrease=1;Slow decrease=2;Basically unchanged=3;Slow growth=4;Fast growth=5	4.054	0.632
家庭特征 Family	家庭人口数 Family size	X₁₃	实际家庭人口数Family Members	3.839	1.293
characteristic	家庭月收入 Monthly household income	X₁₄	≤3 000=1;3 000~5 000=2;5 000~10 000=3; 10 000~15 000=4;≥15 000=5;	4.021	1.007
地区变量	所在城市 City	X₁₅
Area	北京市 Beijing		其他=0;北京市=1;Others=0; Beijing=1	0.301	0.459
Variable	上海市 Shanghai		其他=0;上海市=1;Others=0; Shanghai=1	0.327	0.469
	武汉市 Wuhan		其他=0;武汉市=1;Others=0; Wuhan=1	0.146	0.353
	郑州市 Zhengzhou		其他=0;郑州市=1;Others=0; Zhengzhou=1	0.081	0.273
	西安市 Xi’an		其他=0;西安市=1;Others=0; Xi’an =1	0.060	0.237
	成都市Chengdu		其他=0;成都市=1;Others=0; Chengdu=1	0.085	0.279
行业变量	所属行业 Industry	X₁₆
Industry	科教文卫业 Science		其他=0;科教文卫业=1 Others=0;Science=1	0.207	0.405
variable	农林牧渔业 Agriculture		其他=0;农林牧渔业=1;Others=0;Agriculture=1	0.184	0.388
	机构组织 Organization		其他=0;机构组织=1;Other=0;Organization=1	0.092	0.289
	工商业 Commerce		其他=0;工商业=1;Others=0;Commerce=1	0.214	0.411
	服务业 Service Industry		其他=0;服务业=1;Other=0;Service Industry=1	0.278	0.448
	其他行业 Others		其他=0;其他行业=1;Other=0;Other Industries=1	0.025	0.155

Impact of media negative coverage of honey consumption expectations

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 8

References 9

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

变量 Variable	系数 Coefficient	标准误 SE	P
X1	0.191	0.14	0.171
X2	0.844^***	0.117	<0.001
X3	0.784^***	0.142	<0.001
X4	0.816^***	0.112	<0.001
X5	-0.344^***	0.121	0.005
X6	0.246^***	0.089	0.006
X7	0.165^*	0.093	0.075
X8	-0.258^**	0.126	0.042
X9	-0.101	0.068	0.142
X12	0.354^***	0.104	0.001
X13	0.151^***	0.050	0.002
X14	-0.101	0.069	0.146
X15	控制 Control
X16	控制 Control
Pseudo R²	0.160	Log Likelihood	-880.972
Chi²	336.183	Prob>Chi²	0

指标 Item	Observed Coef.	Bootstrap SE	P>Z
r(att)	0.091^*	0.050	0.068
r(atu)	-0.010	0.051	0.843
r(ate)	0.029	0.043	0.498

变量 Variable	系数 Coefficient	SE	P
X1	2.200^*	1.129	0.051
X2	0.665^***	0.165	<0.001
X3	0.597^***	0.178	0.001
X4	0.720^***	0.138	<0.001
X5	-0.455^***	0.142	0.001
X6	-0.021	0.151	0.888
X7	0.051	0.109	0.641
X8	-0.391^***	0.147	0.008
X9	-0.122	0.078	0.120
X12	0.293^***	0.113	0.010
X13	0.146^***	0.055	0.008
X14	-0.040	0.076	0.596
X15	控制 Control
X16	控制 Control
Pseudo R2	0.153	Log likelihood	-745.271
Chi2	268.270	Prob>chi2	0

[1]	JIN Liwen, LIU Zengjin, LIU Aijun. Participation behavior of pork seller in traceability system: empirical analysis of 636 sellers in Beijing, Shanghai and Jinan, China [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(3): 541-552.
[2]	ZHANG Shasha, ZHENG Xungang, ZHANG Bizhong. Transportation infrastructure, spatial spillover and rural poverty reduction:an empirical study based on panel data [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(3): 553-564.
[3]	WEN Changcun, SUN Yuzhu. Analysis on farmers’ willingness to buy agricultural accessory risk based on regional index in China: a case study on cotton growers in Hebei Province [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(2): 346-354.
[4]	FU Lisha, QIN Tao, PAN Huanxue, DENG Jing. Empirical analysis on scale effect of forest output of forest insurance premium subsidy policy in China: based on difference-in-differences model and event study model [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(2): 355-368.
[5]	LI Haitao, FU Linlin, HUANG Zuhui, PENG Wenhuan. Various forms of moderate-scale management of agriculture and development prospects [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(1): 161-169.
[6]	DONG Yanmin, YAN Fengxian. Spatial-temporal characteristics and coordination of agricultural high-quality development in China [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2021, 33(1): 170-182.
[7]	HU Chenpei, LI Huishang, GUO Xinzhu. Structural characteristics and development gap of regional agricultural economy in China from 1978 to 2017 [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2020, 32(12): 2253-2260.
[8]	GAO Yun, ZHAO Zhijun. Influence of imported honey on market of bee products of China [J]. , 2020, 32(11): 2088-2093.
[9]	CHENG Ya, LI Xinyue, ZHANG Chun, ZHANG Shemei. Empirical study on relationship between agricultural manager pressure and cooperative performance [J]. , 2020, 32(11): 2094-2102.
[10]	HUANG Hexiao, LI Baozhi, ZHU Qibiao, YANG Liangshan, WU Jinghua. Practice of cultivation of high-quality farmers in Zhejiang: in case of Zhejiang Agronomist College [J]. , 2020, 32(10): 1890-1898.
[11]	XIE Qing, QU Litong, YAN Shixiong. Determination of optimal term of land transfer in suburban villages based on construction land expansion prediction [J]. , 2020, 32(10): 1899-1909.
[12]	LIU Jiaojiao, ZHANG Gangren, GAO Qun. Study on price relevance of livestock products based on VEC-BEKK-GARCH and spillover index model [J]. , 2020, 32(9): 1711-1721.
[13]	GUO Yanjing, XIAO Haifeng. Support level and structural characteristics of maize subsidy policy in world's major maize producing countries and region [J]. , 2020, 32(9): 1722-1731.
[14]	ZHANG Gongwang, ZHU Mingfen. Rural residential land reform and promotion of farmers' income: based on panel data of 6 pilot counties (cities, districts) with difference-in-difference analysis [J]. , 2020, 32(8): 1475-1484.
[15]	HU Qiaolian, YANG Jun, SHAO Jingsong, ZHOU Pengquan, GUO Jiarui, HOU Manping. Comprehensive evaluation of land use benefit in early stage of pastoral complex construction: taking Lujia Village as an example [J]. , 2020, 32(8): 1485-1492.

变量 Variable	模型2 Model 2		模型3 Model 3		模型4 Model 4
变量 Variable	事件认知 Event Cognition	事件看法 Views on Events	事件认知 Event Cognition	事件看法 Views on Events	事件认知 Event Cognition	事件看法 Views on Events
自变量 Independent variable	0.531^*** (<0.001)	0.981^*** (<0.001)	0.385^*** (<0.001)	0.895^*** (<0.001)	0.394^*** (0.004)	0.910^*** (<0.001)
蜂蜜质量提升信心 Confidence about honey quality			1.152^*** (<0.001)	1.113^*** (<0.001)
蜂产业发展预测 Forecast of bee industry development					1.032^*** (<0.001)	1.015^*** (<0.001)
控制变量 Control Variable	已控制 Control	已控制 Control	已控制 Control	已控制 Control	已控制 Control	已控制 Control
Log Likelihood	-976.000	-945.751	-936.869	-909.764	-926.114	-898.266
LR Chi²	146.130	206.620	224.390	278.600	245.900	301.590
Prob>Chi²	0	0	0	0	0	0
Pseudo R²	0.070	0.099	0.107	0.133	0.117	0.144

变量 Variable	模型2 Model 2		模型3 Model 3		模型4 Model 4
变量 Variable	事件认知 Event Cognition	事件看法 Views on Events	事件认知 Event Cognition	事件看法 Views on Events	事件认知 Event Cognition	事件看法 Views on Events
自变量 Independent variable	0.531^*** (<0.001)	0.981^*** (<0.001)	0.385^*** (<0.001)	0.895^*** (<0.001)	0.394^*** (0.004)	0.910^*** (<0.001)
蜂蜜质量提升信心 Confidence about honey quality			1.152^*** (<0.001)	1.113^*** (<0.001)
蜂产业发展预测 Forecast of bee industry development					1.032^*** (<0.001)	1.015^*** (<0.001)
控制变量 Control Variable	已控制 Control	已控制 Control	已控制 Control	已控制 Control	已控制 Control	已控制 Control
Log Likelihood	-976.000	-945.751	-936.869	-909.764	-926.114	-898.266
LR Chi²	146.130	206.620	224.390	278.600	245.900	301.590
Prob>Chi²	0	0	0	0	0	0
Pseudo R²	0.070	0.099	0.107	0.133	0.117	0.144