MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1656873868 · doi:10.1037/e667842007-001

Could Behavioral Economics Help Improve Diet Quality for Nutrition Assistance Program Participants?

2007· dataset· en· W1656873868 on OpenAlexfundno aff
David R. Just, Lisa Mancino, Brian Wansink

Bibliographic record

VenuePsycEXTRA Dataset · 2007
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFood and Nutrition ServiceSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungUniversity of AlbertaEconomic Research ServiceWashington State UniversityU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Behavioral economicsSupplemental Nutrition Assistance ProgramBehavioural economicsPsychologyGerontologyPublic economicsMedicineEconomicsFood insecurityMicroeconomicsBiologyFood securityEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Findings from behavioral and psychological studies indicate that people regularly and predictably behave in ways that contradict some standard assumptions of economic analysis.Recognizing that consumption choices are determined by factors other than prices, income, and information illuminates a broad array of strategies to influence consumers' food choices.These strategies expand the list of possible ideas for improving the diet quality and health of participants in the U.S.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.009

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.367
GPT teacher head0.544
Teacher spread0.177 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations80
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsycEXTRA DatasetSame topicDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsFrench-language works237,207