Research ArticleSOCIAL SCIENCES

Mandatory labels can improve attitudes toward genetically engineered food

See allHide authors and affiliations

Science Advances  27 Jun 2018:
Vol. 4, no. 6, eaaq1413
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aaq1413

Figures

  • Fig. 1 Estimated effects of mandatory labels on concern/opposition to GE foods in Vermont based on the difference-in-difference model applied to cross-sectional and time-series surveys of 7871 individuals, controlling for demographics and location-specific trends.

Tables

  • Table 1 Difference-in-difference estimate of the effect of mandatory labeling from multiple regressions.

    Numbers in parentheses are SEs. “After labels” is a variable that takes the value of 1 for responses from dates after July 2017 and 0 for dates before this time period, and “Vermont” is a variable that takes the value of 1 for responses from Vermont and 0 for responses from all other states.

    VariableModel 1Model 2Model 3Model 4Model 5
    Intercept3.229** (0.023)3.122** (0.069)3.081** (0.073)3.156** (0.076)3.172** (0.078)
    After labels0.045 (0.036)0.017 (0.036)−0.048 (0.054)0.074 (0.061)0.060 (0.066)
    Vermont0.625** (0.038)0.653** (0.042)0.651** (0.042)0.441** (0.066)0.417** (0.068)
    After labels × Vermont−0.282** (0.062)−0.264** (0.061)−0.262** (0.061)−0.594** (0.102)−0.579** (0.105)
    DemographicsNoYesYesYesYes
    Overall trendNoNoYesNoNo
    Location-specific trendsNoNoNoYesYes
    Exclude states near VermontNoNoNoNoYes
    R20.040.0760.0760.0780.081
    N78717871787178717171

    **P ≤ 0.01 (statistically significant).

    †The coefficient associated with the interaction of the location and time dummy variables is the difference-in-difference estimate, the difference in opposition to GE in Vermont and opposition to GE in the rest of the United States after labels appeared minus the opposition to GE in Vermont and opposition to GE in the rest of the United States before labels.

    • Table 2 Mean level of concern or opposition by location and time period.
      Time periodLocationN obsMeanSDMinimumMaximum
      March 2014Rest of the United States10323.1881.34715
      Vermont5223.7411.00715
      March 2015Rest of the United States10383.3351.29715
      Vermont5743.7751.03715
      March 2016Rest of the United States10293.1621.35415
      Vermont6584.0121.18315
      November 2016Rest of the United States10023.3601.30415
      Vermont4053.4741.36715
      March 2017Rest of the United States10153.1881.33115
      Vermont5963.7151.15915
    • Table 3 Differences in mean level of concern or opposition by location and time period.
      Timing of labelsLocationN obsMean
      BeforeRest of the United States30993.229
      Vermont17543.854
      Difference0.625
      AfterRest of the United States20173.273
      Vermont10013.617
      Difference0.344
      Difference-in-difference−0.281
    • Table 4 Characteristics of respondents by time and location.
      VariableVermontRest of the United States
      BeforeAfterBeforeAfter
      Age (years)
       18–241.7%5.0%11.6%7.8%
       25–344.3%9.0%21.7%23.5%
       35–449.3%10.8%19.2%17.1%
       45–5417.0%18.4%17.5%15.1%
       55–6426.2%23.7%15.2%17.4%
       65–7423.5%18.0%12.6%15.1%
       75+13.9%10.4%2.2%4.0%
      College degree50.6%49.0%22.5%22.4%
      Female52.6%51.8%49.7%56.9%
      White91.2%89.4%78.8%79.3%
      Children in household24.3%27.7%31.0%32.9%
      Above median income51.4%53.2%54.1%50.7%
      Republican14.3%13.7%26.7%29.4%
      Democrat26.6%27.4%39.8%42.1%
      Independent31.0%23.6%29.9%26.4%
    • Table 5 Difference-in-difference estimates of the effect of mandatory labeling from ordered logit regressions.

      Numbers in parentheses are SEs.

      VariableModel 1Model 2Model 3Model 4Model 5
      After labels0.055 (0.051)0.012 (0.051)-0.138 (0.077)0.113 (0.088)0.096 (0.095)
      Vermont0.831** (0.054)0.885** (0.061)0.883** (0.062)0.471** (0.096)0.433** (0.098)
      After labels × Vermont−0.354** (0.088)−0.332** (0.088)−0.333** (0.088)−1.023** (0.148)−1.005** (0.153)
      DemographicsNoYesYesYesYes
      Overall trendNoNoYesNoNo
      Location-specific trendsNoNoNoYesYes
      Exclude states near VermontNoNoNoNoYes
      N78717871787178717173

      **P ≤ 0.01 (statistically significant).

      Navigate This Article