How knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs impact dairy anti-consumption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine how individual’s health beliefs, nutrition knowledge (NK) and attitudes towards food technologies play a role in the anti-consumption of dairy products or the consumption of dairy alternatives. Design/methodology/approach Self-reported data concerning the consumption of milk, yogurt and dairy products in general were collected online among 1,705 adults in Canada. Also included in the survey instrument were measures of NK and health beliefs as well as questions from the food technology neophobia scale. Anti-consumption of milk, yogurt and dairy as well as alternative dairy consumption as a function of these characteristics, in addition to demographic characteristics, is analysed using probit models. Findings Individuals who demonstrate resistance to innovations in food technology, those with lower levels of dairy-specific NK, and people who have less belief that dairy avoidance will have negative impacts on their health are more likely to be anti-consumers of milk and/or yogurt. The same is true for dairy products in general with the exception that people with higher levels of dairy-specific NK are more likely to be anti-consumers of dairy products in general. Originality/value Inadequate intake of calcium and vitamin D has negative consequences for long-term health. Given that dairy products are the primary source of these nutrients in the Canadian diet, it is important to understand the reasons behind dairy anti-consumption so that appropriate policy measures can be taken to address potential public health issues.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".