MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7043222553

Seasonality effect on US household demand for different beef cuts

2018· article· en· W7043222553 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniSA Research Outputs Repository (University of South Australia) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetition (biology)Consumer demandSeasonalityCertificationConsumer behaviourLogit
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Australia is one the largest exporters of beef and beef products to the United States (Haley & Jones, 2017). A better understanding of the American demand for beef is important since Australia is facing strong competition from Canada and New Zealand in the beef market. We applied a discrete choice experiment to investigate 946 American consumer preferences and willingness-to-pay (WTP) for different beef products. Consumers were presented with a novel experiment in which they indicated “how many” they would purchase for ground, diced, roast, and six cuts of steaks (sirloin, tenderloin, flank, flap, New York and cowboy/rib-eye). The results from a scaled adjusted ordered logit model showed that after price, cues related to safety option purchases such as certified logo, type of packaging, antibiotic free and organic products play a stronger influential role on American consumers’ decision making (especially in summer where the opportunities for foodborne bacteria to thrive in warm weather is higher) compared to other beef attributes.Furthermore, on average US consumers purchase diced and roast products more often in winter “as a slow cooked season” than in summer whereas New York strip and flank steak are more popular in summer as “the grilling season” than in winter. Finally, this study provides managerial and policy implication and recommendations to help Australian exporters to better understand US consumer preferences for beef through an understanding of seasonal effects on demand for this good.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

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 studies0.0010.001
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 head0.223
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.062 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniSA Research Outputs Repository (University of South Australia)Same topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207