MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977770231 · doi:10.1504/ijfsnph.2011.042574

Developing consumer-focused risk communication strategies related to food terrorism

2011· article· en· W1977770231 on OpenAlexaff
Sara Eggers, Linda Verrill, Cory M. Bryant, Sarah Thorne

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Food Safety Nutrition and Public Health · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRisk Perception and Management
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrorismRisk communicationBusinessRisk analysis (engineering)Computer securityInternet privacyComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An essential component of food defence, consumer-focused risk communication strategies related to food terrorism (FT) threats should reflect an in-depth understanding of consumers' perceptions, priorities, and information needs related to those threats. To support development of communication strategies, we used a mental models approach to risk communication method to design, conduct and analyse 50 semi-structured telephone interviews with US adults. Interviewees generally lacked well-defined mental models specific to FT, and, instead, drew on their perceptions of terrorism in general, accidental contamination, product recalls, and emergency preparedness. Assessments of their personal threat of FT were

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations7
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Food Safety Nutrition and Public HealthSame topicRisk Perception and ManagementFrench-language works237,207