{rfName}
So

Indexed in

License and use

Citations

334

Altmetrics

Analysis of institutional authors

Lozano Monterrubio, NataliaAuthorLores, MonicaAuthor
Share
Publications
>
Article

Social media as a useful tool in food risk and benefit communication? A strategic orientation approach

Publicated to:Food Policy. 46 84-93 - 2014-06-01 46(), DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2014.02.003

Authors: Rutsaert, Pieter; Pieniak, Zuzanna; Regan, Aine; McConnon, Aine; Kuttschreuter, Margot; Lores, Monica; Lozano, Natalia; Guzzon, Antonella; Santare, Dace; Verbeke, Wim

Affiliations

Assessment & Registrat Agcy, Food & Vet Serv, Riga, Latvia - Author
Assessment and Registration Agency - Author
Hylobates Consulting S.r.l. - Author
Hylobates Consulting Srl, Rome, Italy - Author
Int Rice Res Inst, Los Banos, Laguna, Philippines - Author
International Rice Research Institute - Author
Univ Coll Dublin, Sch Publ Hlth Physiotherapy & Populat Sci, Dublin 4, Ireland - Author
Univ Ghent, Dept Agr Econ, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium - Author
Univ Rovira & Virgili, Dept Commun Studies, E-43007 Tarragona, Spain - Author
Univ Twente, Dept Psychol Conflict Risk & Safety, NL-7500 AE Enschede, Netherlands - Author
Universitat Rovira i Virgili - Author
Universiteit Gent - Author
University College Dublin - Author
University of Twente - Author
See more

Abstract

Although considerable progress has been made in understanding the determinants of risk perception and in identifying the necessary components of effective food risk and benefit communication, this has not been matched with the development of efficient and appropriate communication tools. Little work has been done examining the implications of the explosion of new media and web technologies, which may offer potential for improving food risk and benefit communication. First, this study examines the views of stakeholders (n= 38) and experts (n= 33) in the food domain on the potential use of these emerging media for food risk/benefit communication. Based on in-depth interviews in six European countries (Belgium, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Spain and The Netherlands), strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) of social media in food risk and benefit communication were identified. Second, a Strategic Orientation Round (SOR) was used to evaluate the relative importance of the SWOT components according to stakeholders (n= 10) and experts (n= 13). Results show that both stakeholders and experts confirm a future role of social media in food risk and benefit communication. Strengths as speed, accessibility and interaction make social media an interesting tool in crisis communication or issue awareness raising. Weaknesses as the lack of a filter, low trust, the risk of information overload and a communication preference for traditional media are acknowledged. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd.

Keywords
AmplificationBeneficiBenefitCommunicationComunicacióConsumersConsumptionEuropeExpertFishFoodGoPerspectivesRiscRiskSocial mediaStakeholderSwotSwot analysis

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal Food Policy due to its progression and the good impact it has achieved in recent years, according to the agency WoS (JCR), it has become a reference in its field. In the year of publication of the work, 2014, it was in position 1/17, thus managing to position itself as a Q1 (Primer Cuartil), in the category Agricultural Economics & Policy.

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from World Citations provided by WoS (ESI, Clarivate), it yields a value for the citation normalization relative to the expected citation rate of: 2.14. This indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: ESI Nov 14, 2024)

This information is reinforced by other indicators of the same type, which, although dynamic over time and dependent on the set of average global citations at the time of their calculation, consistently position the work at some point among the top 50% most cited in its field:

  • Weighted Average of Normalized Impact by the Scopus agency: 3.12 (source consulted: FECYT Feb 2024)
  • Field Citation Ratio (FCR) from Dimensions: 18.86 (source consulted: Dimensions May 2025)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-05-24, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 84
  • Scopus: 97
  • Google Scholar: 153
  • OpenCitations: 83
Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-05-24:

  • The use, from an academic perspective evidenced by the Altmetric agency indicator referring to aggregations made by the personal bibliographic manager Mendeley, gives us a total of: 302.
  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 302 (PlumX).

With a more dissemination-oriented intent and targeting more general audiences, we can observe other more global scores such as:

  • The Total Score from Altmetric: 21.65.
  • The number of mentions on the social network Facebook: 1 (Altmetric).
  • The number of mentions on the social network X (formerly Twitter): 10 (Altmetric).
Leadership analysis of institutional authors

This work has been carried out with international collaboration, specifically with researchers from: Belgium; Eire; Italy; Latvia; Netherlands; Philippines; United Kingdom.