Cited by 137Consumer Attitudes and Food LabelingSensory Analysis and Statistical MethodsFood composition and properties

Consumer perceptions of healthy cereal products and production methods

Dean, M., Shepherd, R., Arvola, A., Vassallo, M., Winkelmann, M., Claupein, E., Lähteenmäki, L., Raats, M.M. +1 more·2007·Journal of Cereal Science

Abstract

Using a survey, this study investigated public perceptions relating to different healthy grain foods (bread, pasta and biscuits) and how these perceptions are influenced by gender, nationality, base product (staple vs. fun food), type of health claim (general vs. specific) and people's perceptions associated with different production methods. Two thousand and ninety-four (50.4% women, 49.5% men) members of the public from the UK, Italy, Finland and Germany completed the survey questionnaire. The participants were over 18 years of age and were solely or jointly responsible for the family's grocery shopping. Results confirmed that similar to other functional foods, there were gender and country differences in people's perceptions of benefits relating to functional grain products. Men perceived more benefit in products with specific health claims and women in products with general health claims. However, when it was personally relevant, men's levels of perceived benefit in products with general health claims were equally high as women's. Further, modification of staple foods was perceived as more beneficial than fun foods and people preferred processes such as fortification and traditional cross-breeding to others such as genetic modification. In addition, the differences in perceived benefits between foods with general and specific health claims were largest for staple foods than for hedonistic foods.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jcs.2007.06.007

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dean, M., Shepherd, R., Arvola, A., Vassallo, M., Winkelmann, M., Claupein, E., Lähteenmäki, L., Raats, M. M., & Saba, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Surrey (GB)
  • VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland (FI)
  • Istituto Nazionale di Ricerca per gli Alimenti e la Nutrizione (IT)
Corresponding author
Dean, M.
Venue
Journal of Cereal Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-11
Volume
46
Issue
3
Pages
188-196
ISSN
0733-5210 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2030290939
Cited by
137
References
30
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 11
FWCI
3.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Cereal Science (publishedVersion)
  • Open Research (University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
  • Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
  • OpenAgrar (submittedVersion)
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
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Food composition and properties
Keywords
consumer perception, functional foods, health claims, bread, pasta, cookies, gender differences, staple foods, food production methods, fortifications, genetic modification, crossbreeding, perceived benefits, cross-national comparison

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