CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 111Consumer Attitudes and Food LabelingSensory Analysis and Statistical MethodsOrganic Food and Agriculture

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How innovativeness relates to social representation of new foods and to the willingness to try and use such foods

Huotilainen, A., Pirttilä-backman, A.-M., Tuorila, H.·2006·Food Quality and Preference
DOI 10.1016/j.foodqual.2005.04.005
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The relationship between domain specific innovativeness scale (DSI) and social representation (SR) components of new foods (suspicion of new foods; adherence to natural food; adherence to technology; eating as an enjoyment; eating as a necessity) was explored in a survey with Finnish consumers (N = 1156). Both DSI and SR were used to predict willingness to try/use new foods, categorized into six subgroups of which three were functional (cereal-based and otherwise functional foods; functional drinks), and the remaining three categories were modified dairy products, organic products, and energy drinks. Enjoyment and low suspicion predicted 27% of variation in DSI, which, in turn, predicted up to 6% of willingness to try categories of new foods, excluding organic products. When added to the predictive model, SR components increased the prediction of all food categories, particularly functional cereal-based and organic products (up to 20.4%). Thus, DSI predicted willingness to try new foods to some extent, but SR components, most of all low suspicion of new foods and adherence to natural food, significantly improved the prediction.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.foodqual.2005.04.005

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 26 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–111 of 111

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Huotilainen, A., Pirttilä-backman, A.-M., & Tuorila, H.
Affiliations
University of Helsinki (FI)
Corresponding author
Huotilainen, A.
ORCID
Tuorila, H.
Venue
Food Quality and Preference
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-07
Volume
17
Issue
5
Pages
353-361
ISSN
0950-3293 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.foodqual.2005.04.005
OpenAlex
W2025771734
Cited by
111
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
FWCI
4.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
Food Quality and Preference (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Organic Food and Agriculture
Keywords
innovativeness, social representations, novel foods, willingness to try, functional foods, functional beverages, organic food, energy drinks, consumer behavior

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