Considérer les normes sociales et culturelles pour une meilleure acceptation des innovations technologiques en alimentation : les leçons du rejet des aliments génétiquement modifiés (OGM)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Face au refus croissant des innovations technologiques alimentaires par les consommateurs, cet article examine le rôle des normes sociales et culturelles dans la formation des représentations associées aux aliments génétiquement modifiés (OGM) et à leurs risques à travers le cas des français. Pour ces derniers, le génie génétique porte atteinte à la sociabilité, au goût et à l’authenticité des aliments. Les perceptions du risque s’avérant largement prédéterminées par la culture alimentaire, cet article propose, au plan managérial, des pistes pour intégrer ces dimensions en amont des processus d’innovation et améliorer plus généralement l’acceptation des nouvelles technologies alimentaires.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".