Does food recall strategy have a positive or negative effect on trust repair? Moderation analysis based on trust violation types and trust disposition

Abstract

Food recall is an important measure in food safety management. This study investigated the impact of food recall strategies on repairing consumer trust in food products. We examined three food recall strategies (voluntary, mandatory, and no recall) adopted by firms after discovering food defects. We designed a scenario-based experiment and used difference-in-differences (DID) models to analyze how these strategies influence consumer trust repair. Furthermore, we examined the moderating roles of trust violation type (competence vs. integrity) and consumer trust disposition. Our results show that both voluntary and mandatory recalls significantly enhance consumer trust in terms of competence, benevolence, and integrity. These findings contrast with previous studies and common consensus that food recalls tend to damage consumer perceptions. We also find that voluntary recalls are more effective than mandatory recalls for repairing consumer trust. Additionally, trust violation type and trust disposition moderate the effects of recall strategies on trust repair. These findings can help firms adopt the most effective trust repair strategies after discovering food defects, and assist regulators in restoring consumer confidence in food quality and safety.