MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910248578 · doi:10.1080/10454446.2019.1566806

The Role of Plant-Based Foods in Canadian Diets: A Survey Examining Food Choices, Motivations and Dietary Identity

2019· article· en· W2910248578 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lisa F. Clark, Ana-Maria Bogdan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Food Products Marketing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersMinistry of Agriculture - SaskatchewanUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsMarketingConsumption (sociology)BusinessSustainabilityFood choiceSociologyBiologyMedicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Used as a replacement for animal-based protein sources, the market for foods containing plant-based proteins (PBPs) continues to grow across North America. As of now, however, few studies of consumer behaviour focus specifically on the dynamics of this development in Canada and so this study looks at how PBPs fit in the current dietary choices of Canadians. Using data collected through a geographically representative nation-wide survey, the analysis shows that past and current consumption of these products are good indicators of future consumption of PBPs. Relatedly, negative stigma attached to earlier versions of PBPs, sometimes referred to as ‘fake meat’, continues to be an issue with current Canadian consumers. The analysis also demonstrates that personal health and animal/environmental ethics play a significant role in individual decisions to eat PBPs instead of meat. Additionally, issues of availability, affordability and concern over the sensory qualities continue to present barriers to future use.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.170

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations105
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Food Products MarketingSame topicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactFrench-language works237,207