Cited by 529Food Waste Reduction and SustainabilityDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsPsychology of Social Influence

‘Nudging’ hotel guests to reduce food waste as a win–win environmental measure

Kallbekken, Steffen, Sælen, Håkon·2013·Economics Letters

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.econlet.2013.03.019

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kallbekken, S., & Sælen, H.
Affiliations
CICERO Center for International Climate Research (NO)
Corresponding author
Sælen, Håkon
Venue
Economics Letters
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-06
Volume
119
Issue
3
Pages
325-327
ISSN
0165-1765 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2052752848
Cited by
529
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 38 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 54 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 54 · 2021: 61 · 2020: 58 · 2019: 47 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 2
FWCI
22.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Economics Letters (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Waste Reduction and Sustainability
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Psychology of Social Influence
Keywords
nudging, food waste reduction, hotel restaurants, social cues, consumer behavior, climate change mitigation, environmental sustainability, guest satisfaction, food purchasing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review