Cited by 191Food Supply Chain TraceabilityConsumer Attitudes and Food LabelingIdentification and Quantification in Food

Food fraud: An exploratory study for measuring consumer perception towards mislabeled food products and influence on self-authentication intentions

Charlebois, Sylvain, Schwab, Anita, Henn, Raphael, Huck, Christian W.·2016·Trends in Food Science & Technology

Abstract

The present study explores the concept of mistrust in country of origin information and the use of technology by consumers to corroborate information on food labels. Despite the plethora of food studies on trust conveyed by different sources, there appears to be a lack of studies exploring consumers' willingness to substantiate information on food labels, more specifically country of origin, and how it is influenced by mistrust. A self-administered survey was conducted in the city of Innsbruck, Austria, to evaluate the relationship between mistrust and the willingness to use technology and verify food label information in food stores. This present study suggests that mistrust towards industry and/or regulators in general augments consumers' willingness to self-authenticate. Findings also suggest that highly educated consumers are more likely to distrust the information on food labels, and are more willing to use a device to validate food label content. Expected results suggest that consumers who read labels on a regular basis expressed a higher willingness to self-authenticate, and that women are more likely to read labels than men. Limitations of the study are presented; theoretical significance and practical implications of the findings are also discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tifs.2016.02.003

Cites

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?

  • Many traceability systems are ineffective: frauds are still quite widespread.

    “However, even today there are several shortcomings because many traceability systems are ineffective: frauds are still quite widespread [94], while the recall costs are often very high in the case of food scandals because the granular traceability is onerous, especially in the case of batch mixing [95].”

    From A Review of Blockchain-Based Systems in Transportation (2019) · cites this paper as [94]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 48 · Cited by 191

Authors
Charlebois, S., Schwab, A., Henn, R., & Huck, C. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Guelph (CA)
  • Universität Innsbruck (AT)
Corresponding author
Charlebois, Sylvain
Venue
Trends in Food Science & Technology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-04
Volume
50
Pages
211-218
ISSN
0924-2244 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2287941411
Cited by
191
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2014: 1
FWCI
23.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Trends in Food Science & Technology (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Innsbruck
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Supply Chain Traceability
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Identification and Quantification in Food
Keywords
food fraud, consumer perception, distrust, country of origin labeling, self-authentication, consumer technology use, consumer education

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