MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203305808 · doi:10.3390/foods10102366

The Impact of Responsible Food Packaging Perceptions on Naturalness and Healthiness Inferences, and Consumer Buying Intentions

2021· article· en· W3203305808 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFoods · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Packaging Perceptions and Trends
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNaturalnessProduct (mathematics)MediationPerceptionPsychologyScale (ratio)MarketingFood productsQuality (philosophy)Consumer behaviourAdvertisingSocial psychologyBusinessFood scienceMathematicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research presented in this article examines the relationship between consumer perceptions that a food package is responsible (sustainable) and consumers' intention to purchase the product that it contains. On the basis of the relevant literature, a conceptual model is proposed where this relationship is hypothesized to be mediated by two variables: the product's perceived naturalness and healthiness. A first study was conducted with the objective of developing a scale with good psychometric properties to measure the perceived naturalness of a food product. The objective of the second study was to test the validity of the two-mediator conceptual model. The results show that the extent to which a food product package is seen as responsible (i.e., recyclable, reusable, compostable) has a positive and statistically significant impact on consumers' intention to buy it, and that it is through the sequential mediation of the product's perceived naturalness and healthiness that this relationship unfolds.

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.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.271 · 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