MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415552025 · doi:10.1093/erae/jbaf036

Motivation and intended use transparency: Shaping consumer responses to a red meat tax through information disclosure

2025· article· en· W4415552025 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Valerie Kilders, Rodolfo M. Nayga, Wei Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Review of Agricultural Economics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHatch
KeywordsRevenueTax revenueRed meatConsumer informationConsumer behaviour

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We investigate the impact of a red meat tax and informational strategies on consumer preferences for ground beef, ribeye steak and alternative proteins in a simulated market. We examine the impact of the tax itself and information about its motivation and revenue usage on demand. Results show the tax shifts demand mainly to other animal-based proteins, with variable responses between beef types, highlighting product-specific sensitivity. Our results also suggest that the effectiveness of the tax in shifting consumer behavior significantly depends on the type of information provided about the tax’s purpose and how its revenues would be recycled.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.332
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.127 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Review of Agricultural EconomicsSame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207