Biased perception about gene technology: How perceived naturalness and affect distort benefit perception

In two experiments, the participants showed biased responses when asked to evaluate the benefits of gene technology. They evaluated the importance of additional yields in corn fields due to a newly introduced variety, which would increase a farmer's revenues. In one condition, the newly introduced variety was described as a product of traditional breeding; in the other, it was identified as genetically modified (GM). The two experiments' findings showed that the same benefits were perceived as less important for a farmer when these were the result of GM crops compared with traditionally bred crops. Mediation analyses suggest that perceived naturalness and the affect associated with the technology per se influence the interpretation of the new information. The lack of perceived naturalness of gene technology seems to be the reason for the participants' perceived lower benefits of a new corn variety in the gene technology condition compared with the perceptions of the participants assigned to the traditional breeding condition. The strategy to increase the acceptance of gene technology by introducing plant varieties that better address consumer and producer needs may not work because people discount its associated benefits.