MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W96595975 · doi:10.22439/dansoc.v15i3.261

Tillid til mad: forbrug mellem dagligdag og politisering

2006· article· en· W96595975 on OpenAlexaff
Bente Halkier, Lotte Holm

Bibliographic record

VenueDansk Sociologi · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducation, Healthcare and Sociology Research
Canadian institutionsDe Veber
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDanishConsumption (sociology)Order (exchange)MarketingPoliticsRelevance (law)Food safetyBusinessControl (management)Food consumptionEnvironmental healthPolitical scienceSociologyEconomicsSocial scienceMedicineAgricultural economicsLawManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bente Halkier og Lotte Holm: Trust in food: Food consumption practice Food consumption has become part of the political agenda in Denmark, in that responsibilities for environmental and similar concerns are increasingly being transferred to ordinary consumers. This article discusses how this new political agenda has influenced the every day understandings and practices as regards food consumption. It commences with a discussion of the concept of trust and its relevance to risk and handling risk in the arena of food consumption. Data come from a telephone survey carried out among a representative sample of adults in Denmark. On the one hand, Danish respondents expressed a general trust, and felt that the foods they eat are not harmful. On the other, they distrusted the safety of a list of specific but ordinary foods found on the market. In order to minimize risks, respondents employed differentiated shopping strategies, reflecting the structure of the food market. A majority of them replied that their shopping practices are influenced by concerns about health and environment, while only 8% report no concern at all about these issues. Danish consumers trusted personal networks more than either public food control systems or market mechanisms in order to procure good and safe food.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.372 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations10
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDansk SociologiSame topicEducation, Healthcare and Sociology ResearchFrench-language works237,207