Four focus groups were conducted in Kentucky to evaluate differences in the participants knowledge of safe food handling practices, where they obtained their knowledge, which source(s) they trusted to provide accurate food safety messages and the effectiveness of messages from three different sources. The sources of food safety messages compared by the focus groups were the Partnership for Food Safety Educations FightBAC! material, food safety materials developed by the American Dietetic Association and funded by ConAgra Foundation and food safety materials developed by the University of Kentucky. Each focus group represented a specific population, (A) limited resource parents (Louisville); (B) married males (Lexington); (C) mothers of young children (Danville); and, (D) females of varied age with background of Cooperative Extension Service sponsored consumer education in food preparation (Lexington). Follow up interviews were conducted through a telephone survey to inquire as to whether any food safety practices had been implemented since participation in the focus groups. The results of the interview revealed that participants expressed varying familiarity with safe food handling practices, varying understanding of the food safety messages and diverse acceptance and preference for the delivery mechanisms.

Master of Science / Department of Hotel, Restaurant, Institutional Management & Dietetics / Elizabeth Barrett / This research created an interactive, multimedia, food safety education program on CD/ROM for fourth through sixth grade school children. The project was divided into three stages: 1) a survey to assess children's needs, 2) program development, and 3) Beta-testing the program with content experts and the targeted audience. A needs assessment survey was administered to children, 9 to 12 years of age, who were members of a 4-H, Boys and Girls Clubs, or after school program. The survey collected demographic data, food handling frequencies/practices, handwashing habits, and computer usage/media preferences. Children were found to be active in food handling/preparation and stated they knew the definition of food safety. Many, however, were unsure of the meaning of cross-contamination, how to use a thermometer, and were inconsistent with safe handwashing practices. Almost 92% of respondents reported using the computer daily, weekly, or monthly and 91% liked using the computer for learning. To facilitate design of the food safety education program, current food safety education programs were reviewed. At the time, there were limited numbers of programs directed at children and even fewer computer-based. A multimedia specialist assisted in the creation of the food safety education program on CD/ROM titled, "Kid Chef and the Clean Kitchen Crew." The program was divided into four chapters: 1) food safety and foodborne illness, 2) handwashing importance and handwashing techniques, 3) foodborne pathogens, and 4) food safety practices from purchase to cooking to serving. Interactive and multimedia components were used throughout the program. Beta-testing with experts from food safety, multimedia, education, extension, and technology ensured that the program was factual and appropriate for fourth through sixth grade students. Additional Beta-testing with ten children in the targeted age group illustrated acceptance, ease of understanding, and navigation. Changes were made prior to each subsequent critique. The reviewers and target audience indicated the CD format was acceptable for presenting food safety education. Recommendations included increasing the amount of animation, video clips, questions, and translation into Spanish. It is further suggested that the program be tested for effectiveness via a pre/post test design.

<p>  </p> <p>Food safety researchers and extension workers are focused on educating the different actors of the supply chain, from farm to fork. To accomplish this, researchers identify areas of improvement and investigate the factors that cause or explain food safety behaviors. This thesis is divided into a systematic literature review with a meta-analysis and qualitative synthesis (Ch. 2), then two case studies that use predictive models to find top predictors of food safety behaviors (Ch.3 and 4). The systematic review (Ch.2) investigates online food safety educational programs and their effectiveness, barriers, and recommendations on different subpopulations of students, consumers, and food workers. The findings showed a limited effect on attitudes in the different subpopulations. Several areas for future research and recommendations for educators were identified. The first case study (Ch.3) developed predictive models of different food safety behaviors at ten time points throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings suggest an effect between changes in COVID-19 case numbers and how well attitudes related to COVID-19 can make predictions. Additionally, findings suggest the importance of attitudes when predicting food safety behaviors. Lastly, results identified that the belief that handwashing protects against foodborne illness was more important than the belief that handwashing protects against COVID-19 when predicting handwashing at most time points. These findings can identify insights into consumer behaviors during the pandemic and several possible areas for future research. The second case study (Ch. 4) developed predictive models of consumer flour handling practices and consumer awareness of flour-related recalls and how they are affected by the total number of flour-related recalls for a state where the consumer lives. Findings identified the importance of risk perceptions in predicting consumer flour handling practices. Results also showed that younger consumers were predicted to be more likely to be aware of flour recalls than consumers of older ages. Lastly, results show that the total number of flour-related recalls for a state where the consumer lives do not affect predictions. Findings identify potential challenges to recall communication and areas for future studies.</p>

<p>While fresh vegetables (FVs) consumption is essential for public health, some high-profile outbreaks that cause severe illnesses are related to their consumption. To illustrate, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and Prevention has estimated 48 million cases of foodborne illnesses in the U.S. per year; of them, about 46% are associated with FVs. The economic impact of food safety issues, estimated at $51 billion annually, is due to medical costs, productivity losses, and loss of consumer trust (Hoffman et al., 2021). </p> <p>The proliferation of risk mitigation methods (GAP, HACCP), food safety policies (FSMA), and information (labels, media, government) out in the market today, suggests that the way consumers understand food safety might be different from what policymakers, researchers, and retailers try to communicate. In addition, consumers' heterogeneous perceptions and beliefs can make communication with policymakers, researchers, and industry stakeholders ineffective when assessing food safety risks. </p> <p>Given the high demand for FVs and the communication mismatch with consumers, it is crucial to understand how consumers value food safety when purchasing FVs. This study clustered FVs consumers based on their food safety concerns. First, a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) identified the most relevant food safety dimensions. Later, using the food safety dimensions, this study segmented FVs consumers based on their food safety concerns. Finally, through a Multinomial Probit model (MNP), this study provided the main factors driving cluster membership.</p> <p>Our results suggest the existence of four segments of FVs consumers: “Worriers” (45% of our sample), who highly valued all the food safety characteristics when buying FVs. “Labelers” (20.3% of our sample) mainly valued attributes related to nutritional and environmental characteristics. “Pretty Vegetables” (17.3% of our sample) searched for the best and safest produce possible. Lastly, “DIYers” (17.3% of our sample) valued the least variables related to convenience in FVs. Finally, some of the main drivers of cluster membership were related to demographics, consumption, information sources, and perceptions about food safety of FVs consumers. These results can help policymakers, researchers, and retailers communicate food safety information more efficiently among different segments of consumers.</p>