Cited by 543Genetically Modified Organisms ResearchRisk Perception and ManagementEconomic and Environmental Valuation

Consumer acceptance, valuation of and attitudes towards genetically modified food: review and implications for food policy

Costa-Font, Montserrat, Gil, José M., Traill, W. Bruce·2008·Food Policy

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.foodpol.2007.07.002

Cites

81 of 81 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
Costa-Font, M., Gil, J. M., & Traill, W. B.
Venue
Food Policy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-04
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
99-111
ISSN
0306-9192 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2079650532
Cited by
543
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 46 · 2015: 50 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 30
FWCI
11.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Food Policy (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
European Commission
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Environmental Valuation
Keywords
genetically modified foods, genetically modified organisms, consumer acceptance, willingness to pay premium, willingness to accept, consumer attitudes, trust in information sources, food safety, behavioural determinants

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