Influence of Health and Environmental Information on Hedonic Evaluation of Organic and Conventional Bread
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Grain from paired samples of the hard red spring wheat cultivar "Park" grown on both conventionally and organically managed land was milled and baked into 60% whole wheat bread. Consumers (n= 384) rated their liking of the bread samples on a 9-point hedonic scale before (blind) and after (labeled) receiving information about organic production. Consumers liked organic bread more (P < 0.05) than conventional bread under blind and labeled conditions. Environmental information about organic production did not impact consumer preference changes for organic bread, but health information coupled with sensory evaluation increased liking of organic bread. Ordinary least squares (OLS) and binary response (probit) regression models identified that postsecondary education, income level, frequency of bread consumption, and proenvironmental attitudes played a significant role in preference changes for organic bread. The techniques used in this study demonstrate that a combination of sensory and econometric techniques strengthens the evaluation of consumer food choice.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".