Genetically modified organisms (GMO) in opinions completing secondary schools in Lublin

Open access


The objective of the conducted analysis is the opinion of adolescents completing secondary schools concerning genetically modified organisms (GMO) and determination of the relationship between the level of knowledge concerning GMO, and evaluation of the safety of their use in industry and agriculture.

The scope of problems undertaken was elaborated based on the survey studies conducted on a group of 500 adolescents completing secondary schools from the Lublin Region, including 250 attending general profile secondary schools and 250 from agricultural technical schools. The study was conducted by the method of a diagnostic survey, using the questionnaire technique. The results of the study showed that the respondents perceived both positive and negative aspects of producing genetically modified (GM) products. These evaluations were significantly related with the respondents’ level of knowledge concerning GMO. The higher the level of knowledge, the more positive the evaluations of the adolescents concerning the cultivation and breeding of GMO, and more frequent indications that the consumption of products manufactured from these organisms is safe.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • BUCHOWICZ J. 2009. Biotechnologia molekularna. Modyfikacje genetyczne postępy problemy. Wyd. Naukowo-Techniczne Warszawa.

  • CARDELLO A. 2003. Consumer concerns and expectations about novel food processing technologies: Effects on product liking. Appetite 40: 217-233.

  • COOK A. J. KERR G. N. MOORE K. 2002. Attitudes and intentions towards purchasing GM food. Journal of Economic Psychology. 23 5 October: 557-572.

  • CRAWLEY M.J. BROWN S.L. HAILS R.S. I WSP. 2001. Transgenic crops in natural habitats. Nature. 409: 682-683.

  • DĄBROWSKI Z. T. TWARDOWSKI T. 2007. GMO - Wprowadzenie. Kosmos: Problemy Nauk Biologicznych. 56; (3-4): 209-211.

  • FLOREK-ŁUSZCZKI M LACHOWSKI S. CHMIELEWSKI J. JURKIEWICZ A. 2016. Knowledge of adolescents completing secondary schools concerning genetically modified organisms (GMO). Edukacja Ustawiczna Dorosłych. 93 2.

  • GAWĘCKI J. 2002. Żywność nowej generacji a racjonalne żywienie Żywność. Nauka. Technologia. Jakość. 3 4: 5-15.

  • KUIPER A.H. KLETER A.G. NOTEBORN P.J. KOK E.J. 2001. Assessment of the food safety issues related to genetically modified foods. The Plant Journal 27 6: 503–528.

  • KOSICKI J. KOSICKA-GĘBSKA M. 2012. Rośliny GMO i żywność genetycznie modyfikowana – nowość wzbudzająca ciekawość nadzieje i obawy Acta Scientifica AcaDemiae Ostroviensis Zeszyty Naukowe Sectio A – 1 1: 135-149.

  • MAHON D. COWAN C. McCARTHY M. 2006. The role of attitudes subjective norm perceived control and habit in the consumption of ready meals and takeaways in Great Britain. Food Quality and Preference 17: 474-481.

  • NOCELLA G. KENNEDY O. 2012. Food health claims – What consumers understand. Food Policy 37: 520-529.

  • PIETRZYK S. BŁONIARCZYK K. 2007. Żywność genetycznie modyfikowana Laboratorium 9: 34-38.

  • Poles about food safety and GMO. Report from studies 2013 CBOS Warszawa [“In Polish”].

  • Poles regarding GMO. Report from studies 2012 TNS Pentor Warszawa [In Polish”].

  • ROSZKOWSKI A. 2007. Technika rolnicza a GMO (Biotechnologia - Bioinżynieria-Rośliny transgeniczne) Inżynieria Rolnicza 8 96: 219-224.

  • RUNGE C.F. JACKSON L.A. 2000. Negative labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs): the experience of rBST Ag Bio Forum – 3 1: 58-62.

  • SKAWIŃSKA M. BLICHARSKA J. 2012. Genetycznie modyfikowane rośliny – zagrożenie czy korzyści Studia Medyczne 27 3: 73-81.

  • TWARDOWSKI T. 2007. Opinia publiczna a GMO. Biotechnologia 3 78: 45-65.

  • VERBEKE W. FREWER L.J. SCHOLDERER J. de BRABANDER H.F. 2006. Why consumer behave as they do with respect to food safety and risk information. Analytica Chimica Acta 586: 2-7.

  • WIĘCKOWSKI S.K. 2008. Genetycznie Modyfikowane Organizmy (GMO) – obietnice i mity. Wyd. Ekonomia i Środowisko Białystok.

Journal information
Impact Factor

CiteScore 2018: 0.41

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.143
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.387

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 397 196 9
PDF Downloads 266 116 9