Attitudes of Finnish dog-owners about programs to control canine genetic diseases

Attitudes of Finnish dog-owners about programs to

control canine genetic diseases

Minna LeppaÈnena,*, Annukka Paloheimob, Hannu Saloniemia

aFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Helsinki,

P.O. Box 57, 00014 Helsingin, Yliopisto, Finlandb15 Old Farmhouse Drive, Oxshott, Surrey Kt 22 0EY, UK

Received 15 March 1999; accepted 28 September 1999

Abstract

A mailed questionnaire survey was done to study dog-owners' knowledge of canine inherited

diseases and the present screening and control programs in Finland, as well as to study the

importance of health-related matters and well-being to dog-owners. The purpose was also to study

the owners' role in programs and the influence of health and well-being in their decision-making

process and choices when purchasing a puppy. This study showed that dog-owners highly valued

health-related matters and well-being. The present programs were considered to have a positive

effect on the prevention of canine inherited diseases. Dog-owners estimated that their own

knowledge could be better but they believed in veterinarians' and dog-breeders' ability to inform

them. Inherited skeletal and ocular diseases were thought to be important to canine well-being; the

importance of other diseases or behaviour problems was assessed to be lower. In choosing a suitable

breed, behaviour and temperament were the most-important factors but health-related matters were

essential in actually choosing a puppy's breeder and the litter. Well-being and health were also

considered very important to the image of the dog hobby. # 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights

reserved.

Keywords: Dog; Genetic disease; Health programs; Human±animal relationships; Questionnaires; Finland

1. Introduction

Control programs for canine genetic diseases have been focused purely on disease

prevention (LeppaÈnen et al., 1999), but studies of effectiveness have been scarce

Preventive Veterinary Medicine 43 (2000) 145±158

* Corresponding author. Tel.: �358-9-2747-640; fax: �358-9-2747-6450.

E-mail address: [email protected] (M. LeppaÈnen).

0167-5877/00/$ ± see front matter # 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

PII: S 0 1 6 7 - 5 8 7 7 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 9 8 - 7

(LeppaÈnen and Saloniemi, 1998; LeppaÈnen and Saloniemi, 1999); this has led to

criticism of these programs. On the other hand, in today's society pets are often

considered to be family members with their own right for well-being (Hirschman,

1994). A pet's well-being can also be considered part of the owner's social well-being.

Thus, health programs with more-abstract emotional or social benefits for pets or

owners instead of direct economical or epidemiological benefits can be justified

(LeppaÈnen et al., 1999). As one of the key groups in canine health promotion, dog-

owners' attitudes and values are essential in planning and implementing the programs

(Downie et al., 1992).

Dog-owners can be considered consumers in two ways: First, dog-breeders market

their products (puppies). Second, health services like health programs are marketed to

dog-owners by experts that could be breeders, kennel clubs or veterinarians in their

capacity as health professionals.

Dog-owners' consumer behaviour starts even before they buy a dog; they in many

cases have to decide the breed and after that choose the breeder and the litter. Making

these decisions can be affected Ð in addition to other factors Ð by health-related

information and knowledge and also by personal values of the potential dog-owner.

Consumers can base their decisions on emotion-driven choices or cognitive information-

processing (Elliot, 1998). Decision heuristics can be recommendation-based, where

information and recommendations from different sources are obtained (Duhan et al.,

1997). We can assume that professional and expert information dog-owners get from

breeders and veterinarians can be vital to consumers' decision-making process, if such

advise exists or is given (Moorthy et al., 1997).

In human medicine, consumerism (that is a change from a doctor±patient relationship

towards an expert-service supplier) has been observed and to some extent also promoted

(Lupton, 1997). By analogy, the dog-owners' attitudes to health programs and health

behaviour can be studied as consumer behaviour. A person's health behaviour can be

affected by their personal feelings of self-management or by social interactions towards

them. Also, initiation and maintenance of health-related behaviour need different

conditions. (Siegrist, 1988). Consumers' types and levels of involvement in programs can

also differ (Laurent and Kapferer, 1985). The knowledge and information of different key

groups greatly affect their motivation to participate and also compliance in programs. If

consumers lack knowledge regarding the programs, their actions are not likely to help

maintain the programs (Rudd and Glanz, 1990). Various types of health promotion are

directed to dog-owners and their health-related decisions are affected by expert as well as

other non-expert information sources (Selnes and Troye, 1989; Moorman and Matulich,

1993, Duhan et al., 1997).

This survey is the third and final part of a larger study concentrating on attitudes and

knowledge of different key groups towards control programs of canine genetic diseases in

Finland. The purpose of this survey was to study Finnish dog-owners' knowledge and

acquisition of information about canine inherited diseases and control programs. It also

studied dog-owners' opinions of their role in control programs and their participation in

the programs. The third objective was to study dog-owners' opinions of the effectiveness

of control programs to canine well-being and factors affecting their choices and decision-

making while purchasing a dog or participating in health programs.

146 M. LeppaÈnen et al. / Preventive Veterinary Medicine 43 (2000) 145±158

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Collection of data

Data for this study were obtained by a mailed survey. For the study, 15 breeds

representing five groups were chosen (Table 1). Five breeds were most-often mentioned

as sick in our previous study (group 1) (LeppaÈnen et al., 1999); five breeds were currently

involved in control programs that have succeeded at controlling hip dysplasia (group 2)

and five breeds did not succeed (group 3); and five breeds were successful (group 4) and

five unsuccessful (group 5) for inherited ocular diseases. Because these groups overlap,

15 breeds in total were included in the study. The breeds were the same as in our survey

of dog-breeders (LeppaÈnen et al., 2000). The Finnish Kennel Club's registration data for

these breeds from 1993 to 1997 was stratified according to the breed and the year. From

each strata, we randomly chose twenty dog-owners using random numbers created by a

random-number generator. These two groups were chosen because we assumed that the

more-recent dog-owners could be able to remember better their criteria for choosing a

breed, a breeder and a litter and on the other hand, we expected that the older ones might

have more experience in actually participating in health programs and the effects of

health-related issues to them and their pet. The questionnaire was sent to 640 owners in

May 1998. A follow-up reminder was sent to those who had not answered within 2 weeks

Table 1

Breeds included in the survey of Finnish dog-owners' attitudes about control programs for canine genetic

diseases (n � number of respondents within each breed. NA � not applicable/no data available)

Breed n Inclusion criteria

Affected breed

rankinga

Breeding success in

Hip programb Eye programc

German shepherd 10 1 No NA

Labrador retriever 15 2 Yes Yes

Pug 15 3 NA NA

Golden retriever 14 4 Yes Yes

English cockerspaniel 22 5 Yes No

Saint bernhard 13 9 No NA

Rottweiler 10 10 Yes NA

Boxer 15 13 No NA

Rough collie 13 15 No No

Doberman 18 23 No No

Flat-coated retriever 19 NA Yes Yes

Longhaired miniature dachshund 14 NA NA Yes

Miniature poodle 11 NA NA No

Toy poodle 11 NA NA No

Wirehaired dachshund 14 NA NA Yes

a Breeds that were mentioned most often when Finnish veterinarians were asked to name especially `̀ sick''

breeds (LeppaÈnen et al., 1999). Breeds are ordered from the highest to the lowest ranking.b Breeds that succeeded vs unsucceeded in hip dysplasia control program (LeppaÈnen and Saloniemi, 1999).c Breeds that succeeded vs unsucceeded in eye disease control program (LeppaÈnen and Saloniemi, 1998).

M. LeppaÈnen et al. / Preventive Veterinary Medicine 43 (2000) 145±158 147

and we asked that questionnaires be returned within 1 week. Thirty-nine questionnaires

were returned because the recipient's address was wrong.

2.2. Questionnaire design

The seven-paged questionnaire consisted of five parts with 26 questions. Completion of

the questionnaire took approximately 20 min. A copy of the questionnaire is available

upon request from the authors. The questionnaire was made as analogous as possible to

the previous questionnaire to veterinarians and dog-breeders (LeppaÈnen et al., 1999,

2000) to enable comparisons between these key groups. Some questions from the

previous questionnaires were omitted, because we thought that answering them would

have required expertise and professionalism we considered an average dog-owner would

not have. Also, the phrasing was changed in some questions from veterinary terminology

to everyday language. Part A was concerned with general information on the dog-owner.

Part B contained questions about dog-owners' participation in organized kennel- or

breed-club activity and their backgrounds as dog-owners. Part C asked questions about

the dog-owners' reasons for choosing their breed and breeder. Parts D and E concentrated

on the dog-owners' opinions about their own and the breeders' knowledge and acquisition

of information about inherited disease and control programs and part F on the

effectiveness of the health programs and the importance of inherited diseases to the well-

being of the animal.

The questions were closed with predetermined and precoded categories. Most Likert-

scale questions had five classes, with a few exceptions where yes/no alternatives were

found to be more suitable. As an open-ended question, dog-owners were asked to name

typical health problems that might exist in their own breed. A draft questionnaire was

pretested on five volunteer owners and the results and feedback received was used to

modify the questionnaire. Each questionnaire was mailed accompanied by a covering

letter explaining the purpose and the scope of the study and a prepaid, self-addressed

return envelope.

2.3. Statistical methods

Differences between owner groups in Likert-scored answers using Likert-scores of

various questions as dependent variable, were compared either with the Kruskal±Wallis

test or the Mann±Whitney U test. Owner groups 1993 and 1997 as well as successful vs

unsuccessful breeds within eye or hip program, respectively, were compared with Mann±

Whitney U test. The groups divided according to the breed's participation in health

programs (no health program vs obligatory screening of hips or eyes for breeding stock vs

established threshold values for breeding animals) as well as breeds according to each

breed's study inclusion criteria were compared with the Kruskal±Wallis test. (For this

comparison, owners in all breeds were combined.)

The Friedman two-way analysis of variance by ranks blocked on respondent, followed

by multiple-comparison tests was used for ranking the importance of different sources of

information, health actions, diseases, statements about health promotion and control-

programs' importance and criteria for choosing a breed or breeder. Also, to compare dog-


owners' opinions of the level of knowledge between themselves and breeders, the

Friedman analysis was used (Siegel and Castellan, 1988). The Wilcoxon signed-rank test

was used to analyse the differences of the importance of the various sources of

information at present compared to the future. P < 0.001 were considered significant. For

all statistical analyses, Statistix Version 4.1 (Analytical Software, Tallahassee, FL, USA)

was used.

3. Results

The final analysis consisted of 214 returned questionnaires (response percentage

35.6%), though not all the respondents answered every question. Between the different

groups of dog-owners according to the breed they owned or the year they bought a dog,

no significant differences could be found (the smallest p � 0.312), so for the final

analysis all the data were pooled into one group.

3.1. Respondent profile

The median age of respondents was 32 years (minimum 3 and maximum 77 years).

76% were women. Most (77% and 62%) were the Kennel Club or breed-club members,

respectively, but only 8% of respondents held any office at present (e.g. board or

breeding-committee membership) in their clubs. Only 3% considered themselves to be

professionally linked with dog breeding. The median time from the purchase of the very

first dog was 5 years (minimum 1 and maximum 43 years; and median number of owned

dogs was 2 (minimum 1 and maximum 30 dogs). The number of respondents in each

breed varied from 10 to 22 (median 14). The proportions of different purchase years were

quite even (44% purchased in 1993 vs 56% purchased in 1997).

3.2. Knowledge and acquisition of information

3.2.1. Dog-owners

Almost one-half of the owners estimated that the personal knowledge they possessed of

canine inherited diseases and health-control programs was average and 27% estimated

themselves to be below average when compared to other owners (Table 2). Also, over half

(54%) of the respondents estimated that they had obtained too-little information on both

the inherited diseases and the control programs. Many respondents who estimated their

knowledge to be average wanted to obtain more information. Owners were also asked to

estimate the importance of different sources of information at the moment, and how

effective these sources could be. Rankings between different sources at present and in the

future were in most cases alike; however, veterinarians' importance at the present was

ranked third, but their estimated future importance was ranked first. In most cases,

though, there was a significant (p < 0.001) gap between the estimated effectiveness of the

source now and how effective it could be (Fig. 1). In addition to veterinarians, the most-

important sources of information were believed to be the breed-club and the Kennel Club

magazines and breeders.


Table 2

Information gained about and knowledge possessed of canine hereditary diseases by dog-owners and breeders,

according to 214 Finnish dog-owners (% of respondents in each group)

Score level Level of knowledgea Score level Amount of gained informationb

Owners (1) Breeders (2) Owners (3) Breeders (4)

Much below average8 2 Much too little 24 6

Below average 19 12 Too little 30 31

Average 47 41 Adequate 45 62

A little over average 20 41 A little too much 0.5 0

Much over average 6 4 Much too much 0.5 1

a Columns with different labels (1,2) are significantly different (p � 0.0000, df � 1, Friedman two-way

ANOVA).b Columns with different labels (3,4) are significantly different (p � 0.0000, df � 1, Friedman two-way

ANOVA).

Fig. 1. Dog-owners sources of information about inherited diseases and control programs. For each source both

the percentage of respondents ranking the source important at present or in the future are presented. *** � a

significant (p < 0.001) difference between the estimated effectiveness of the source currently and potentially.


3.2.2. Breeders

Dog-owners estimated that 46% of breeders had high level of knowledge and also that

63% of breeders obtained enough information about inherited diseases and control

programs. However, 14% of the owners estimated that also breeders had poor knowledge

and 37% considered that breeders did not get enough information (Table 2). The

difference of level of gained knowledge and ability of obtaining information between

breeders and owners was also statistically significant (p < 0.001).

3.3. Effectiveness of control programs

3.3.1. Inherited diseases and the quality of life

Expected lifetime: When the respondents were asked to estimate how often inherited

diseases cause euthanasia of young (<3 years old) dogs, diagnosed but asymptomatic

inherited diseases were never a cause to euthanise young dogs. As could be expected,

inherited diseases causing clinical signs are a more-common reason for euthanasia Ð

though also very seldom Ð only 5% of respondents answered `̀ yes'' to this question.

Well-being: Over half of respondents considered that the canine health situation in

general and also the situation regarding inherited diseases will remain stable in the future.

Only 11% believed that the situation will worsen. Owners considered inherited skeletal

and ocular diseases to be the two most-important factors affecting canine well-being

(Fig. 2). Differences between the rankings were also statistically significant. When asked

if their own breed had serious health problems, 39% of the respondents answered `̀ yes''.

When the respondents were asked to name those health problems they considered the

most serious, skeletal problems were mentioned most often. Many respondents also

specified non-heritable skeletal problems Ð like back and disc diseases in dachshunds Ð

in their answers. Inherited ocular diseases, skin problems and allergies were also

considered to be common. Behaviour problems were mentioned here only a few times.

Typically, the respondents gave very personal answers and many of them directly

mentioned that their own dog had these diseases or problems.

Effectiveness of health programs and health promotion: The owners were not asked to

rank the effectiveness of previous health-promotion actions, because we considered that it

might be impossible for many of them to do so. When we asked dog-owners to evaluate

methods which could be possibly considered in the future, dog-owners thought that the

Kennel Club's function of offering information to breeders and veterinarians, and

veterinarians' information to breeders would be the most-effective methods (Fig. 3).

These were all ranked higher than information directly to dog-owners either from

veterinarians or the Kennel Club. All these educational methods are in very limited use at

present.

3.4. Owners' health behaviour, attitudes towards health promotion and

commitment to control programs

Behaviour and temperament had been the most-important criteria for dog-owners in

choosing the breed (Fig. 4) followed by the suitable size and appearance. The actual

breeder and the litter were chosen mostly because of the good health situation and health-


Fig. 2. Importance of different disease types to canine well-being according to Finnish dog-owners. Columns

represent the percentages of respondents concerning the importance of each disease type high or low and those

who could not answer. The percentage of respondents ranking importance of each disease moderate are not

presented.

Table 3

Highest and lowest rankings and mean ranks (Friedman two-way ANOVA) amongst 16 statements concerning

health promotion and control programs according to Finnish dog-owners

Ranking Mean rank Statement

1 13.0 I respect a breeder who actively takes part in health programs

2 12.6 It is irresponsible to breed with non-screened animals

3 12.4 Control programs benefit the dog hobby in the future

4 11.9 Health programs give the dog hobby a better image

5 11.5 I am willing to pay more for a puppy from screened parents

12 5.9 My breed has more serious problems than those currently in

control programs

13 5.2 Because of control programs health issues have too much

emphasis on dog breeding

14 4.8 Control programs give a negative image of breeds health situation

15 4.6 Control programs limit the dog hobby too much

16 4.0 Also dogs affected by inherited diseases can be used in breeding


screening results of parent animals. Also the puppy's availability at a suitable time and

the breeder's reputation had essential roles (Fig. 5).

When we ranked dog-owners' opinions concerning various statements about health

promotion and control programs, those statements that valued positive health behaviour

were ranked the highest. Those statements that had negative attitude to control-programs

or their importance accordingly had very low ranks (Table 3).

4. Discussion

Because the overall response proportion of 35.6% is not very high, the findings in the

survey must be interpreted cautiously. A second mailed reminder or a phone-interview

would possibly have given a higher response proportion. Unfortunately, the addresses of

dog-owners were those that were given to the Kennel Club at the time of the purchase of a

dog. Due to the data-management system of the Finnish Kennel Club, these files are not

updated simultaneously with the member register files. Because of this, it can be assumed

that even more questionnaires than those returned by post did not reach the targeted

Fig. 3. Effectiveness of different types of actions to improve canine health situation according to Finnish dog-

owners. Columns represent the percentages of respondents concerning the importance of each type of health

action high or low and those who could not answer. The percentage of respondents ranking importance of health-

action moderate are not presented.


Fig. 4. Factors affecting dog-owners' choice for a breed.

15

4M

.L

epp

a Ènen

eta

l./Preven

tiveV

eterina

ryM

edicin

e43

(2000)

145±158

Fig. 5. Factors affecting dog-owners' choices for the litter and the breeder.

M.

Lep

pa Èn

enet

al./P

reventive

Veterin

ary

Med

icine

43

(2000)

145±158

155

persons. Also, some people received the questionnaire, even if they no longer owned the

dog. Their interest in answering this type of survey was probably low.

4.1. Dog-owners' role in health promotion, knowledge and ability to get information

A health program must be planned and acted upon by all target groups together. Dog-

owners must have enough information to be able to make reasonable decisions

concerning health-related issues. To motivate dog-owners to take part in programs, they

must have enough knowledge to feel familiar with the programs, or expertise to be able to

make expert decisions (Alba and Hutchinson, 1987). On the other hand, consumers' lack

of expertise can be supplemented by recommendations given by information sources with

high credibility or expertise (Duhan et al., 1997).

Dog-owners felt that they lacked information more than breeders. However, they had a

more-positive view about their own knowledge than veterinarians and breeders had

(LeppaÈnen et al., 1999, 2000). Dog-owners shared the opinions of other key groups

(veterinarians and breeders) that their own role is more that of a customer receiving

information from professionals and making purchasing and health decisions guided by

this information (LeppaÈnen et al., 1999, 2000). Thus, our study is supported by previous

studies that show the importance of emotion-driven choices in consumer behaviour

(Elliot, 1998). On the other hand, dog-owners believed that professionals have better

knowledge and could provide information more effectively. This gives reason to believe

that dog-owners are mostly satisfied with their role as consumers with a limited expertise

and reliance on experts (Alba and Hutchinson, 1987; Joos and Hickam, 1990; Rudd and

Glanz, 1990; Parasuman et al., 1991; Duhan et al., 1997). This is supported by the finding

that dog-owners expected their present important sources of information to be the best

also in the future (though the sources could be even-more effective than today). If we

accept the conclusion that dog-owners see themselves as consumers, we can also explain

their satisfaction with their limited knowledge: dog-owners do not feel that they need so

much objective information for decision processes than those they consider experts;

instead, they make their decisions using more emotion and subjective knowledge (Selnes

and Troye, 1989; Joos and Hickam, 1990; Moorthy et al., 1997; Elliot, 1998). Dog-

owners' attitudes in this survey also support previous findings that lay people often lack

the specialised knowledge of professionals Ð which limits consumerism in health-

services (Lupton, 1997).

4.2. Effectiveness and usefulness of control programs

This study showed that dog-owners highly valued health-related matters and well-

being. Health and well-being were amongst the most-important factors affecting their

choices of a dog or a breeder. Although 39% of dog-owners considered that their own

breed had serious health problems, dog-owners clearly had a more-positive view than the

breeders: in our previous study (LeppaÈnen et al., 2000), almost 60% of the breeders of the

same breeds considered their breeds to have serious health problems. We suspect that this

difference is due to the better knowledge of breeders.


Dog-owners shared a positive attitude towards the health programs and their

effectiveness. On the other hand, owners believed that the health situation of their breed

has been and will remain stable. Thus, it can be assumed that dog-owners' positive

attitudes are directed more towards the health-promotional aspects of programs than

towards their actual efficacy in disease prevention. They very much shared breeders'

opinions of health programs' usefulness in giving a better image to the hobby and also

better economical value to puppy sales. Another possible reason for a positive attitude to

health programs could be that dog-owners also consider inherited skeletal and ocular

diseases to be the most-important factors affecting canine well-being. This view was

different than that of veterinarians, who considered the importance of inherited diseases

to be less than some others (LeppaÈnen et al., 1999). This can be explained by

veterinarians' broader view of the dog population and their clinical experience; on the

other hand, owners might over-emphasise those diseases that are most often discussed

and written about in dog-magazines Ð even more than those diseases of which they have

personal experiences of (although in this survey personal experience seemed also to have

effect on owners opinions).

5. Conclusions

Finnish dog-owners typically felt that they had adequate knowledge about the present

type of health screening and control programs. Due to this they also have a very positive

attitude and strong belief in present type of health screening and control programs. Dog-

owners Ð like other key groups Ð considered information important and relied on health

and dog-breeding professionals' expertise and ability to disseminate the information to

them. They were also satisfied with their own role as consumers, whose choices in buying

dogs or canine health services were affected by health-related issues and information.

Dog-owners also highly valued health-related matters and well-being.

Acknowledgements

This study was financially supported by the Research Fund of the Finnish Kennel Club

and Grants of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine of the University of Helsinki. Mr. Arto

Ketola, M.Soc.Sc., helped with the statistics. Veterinary student, Ms. Marianne Ikonen

assisted with data management. Mr. Pekka Kohonen and Mr. Hannu Kurki from the data

department of the Finnish Kennel Club prepared the needed address files.

References

Alba, J.W., Hutchinson, J.W., 1987. Dimensions of consumer expertise. J. Cons. Res. 13, 411±454.

Downie, R.S., Fyfe, C., Tannahill, A., 1992. Health Promotion: Models and Values. Oxford University Press,

Oxford, 183 pp.

Duhan, F.D., Johnson, S.D., Wilcox, J.B., Hareel, G.D., 1997. Influences on consumer use of word-of-mouth

recommendation sources. J. Acad. Marketing Sci. 25(4), 283±295.


Elliot, R., 1998. A model of emotion-driven choice. J. Marketing Mgmt. 14, 95±108.

Hirschman, E.C., 1994. Consumers and their companion animals. J. Cons. Res. 20, 616±632.

Joos, S.K., Hickam, D.H., 1990. How health professionals influence health behavior: patient provider interaction

and health care outcomes. In: Glanz, K., Lewis, F.M., Rimer, B.K. (Eds.), Health Behavior and Health

Education. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 216±241.

Laurent, G., Kapferer, J.N., 1985. Measuring consumer involvement profile. J. Marketing Res. XXII, 41±53.

LeppaÈnen, M., Paloheimo, A., Saloniemi, H., 1999. Attitudes of Finnish veterinarians about programs to control

canine genetic diseases. Prev. Vet. Med. 38, 239±257.

LeppaÈnen, M., Paloheimo, A., Saloniemi, H., 2000. Attitudes of Finnish dog-breeders about programs to control

canine genetic diseases. Prev. Vet. Med. 43, 159±175.

LeppaÈnen, M., Saloniemi, H., 1998. Screening and controlling canine inherited ocular diseases in Finland:

epidemiological, economical and health promotional aspect. Vet. Ophthalmol. 1, 203±210.

LeppaÈnen, M., Saloniemi, H., 1999. Controlling canine hip dysplasia in Finland. Prev. Vet. Med. 42, 121±131.

Lupton, D., 1997. Consumerism, reflexivity, reflexivity and the medical encounter. Soc. Sci. Med. 45(3), 373±

381.

Moorman, C., Matulich, E., 1993. A model of consumers preventive health behaviors: the role of health

motivation and health ability. J. Cons. Res. 20, 208±228.

Moorthy, S., Ratchford, B.T., Talukdar, D., 1997. Consumer information search revisited: theory and empirical

analysis. J. Cons. Res. 23, 263±277.

Parasuman, A., Berry, L., Ziethaml, V., 1991. Understanding customer expectations of service. Sloan Mgmt Rev.

Spring, 39±48.

Rudd, J., Glanz, K., 1990. How individuals use information for health action: consumer information processing.

In: Glanz, K., Lewis, F.M., Rimer, B.K. (Eds.), Health Behavior and Health Education. Jossey-Bass, San

Francisco, CA, pp. 115±139.

Selnes, F., Troye, S.V., 1989. Buying expertise, information search and problem solving. J. Econ. Psychol. 10,

411±428.

Siegel, S., Castellan, N.J., 1988. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill,

New York, NY, 399 pp.

Siegrist, J., 1988. Models of health behaviour. Eur. Heart J. 9, 709±714.


Attitudes of Finnish dog-owners about programs to control canine genetic diseases

Documents

Transcript of Attitudes of Finnish dog-owners about programs to control canine genetic diseases