Food handlers' beliefs and self-reported practices
Abstract
Despite an increase in the number of food handlers receiving food hygiene training, a high proportion of food poisoning outbreaks still occur as a result of poor food handling practices. This paper uses elements of social cognitive theory to examine the beliefs of food handlers towards food safety and to determine food handlers' self-reported practices. Questionnaires were completed by 137 food handlers from 52 small to medium-sized food businesses in Wales. Generally, food handlers were aware of the food safety actions they should be carrying out but identified a number of barriers which would prevent them from implementing these practices. These barriers included lack of time, lack of staff and a lack of resources. Despite 95% of respondents receiving food hygiene training, 63% admitted to sometimes not carrying out food safety behaviours. All the food handlers also perceived their business to be of relatively low risk and yet all businesses prepared high risk foods. This research highlights the need for training to be based around a risk-based approach and demonstrates that behavioural change will not occur merely as a result of training. Food safety practices will only be implemented given adequate resources and an appropriate management culture.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
In most cases, food hygiene training does not translate into positive food handling behaviors.
“Unfortunately, in most cases, food hygiene training does not translate into positive food handling behaviors [25,30].”
From A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Food Safety and Hygiene Training on Food Handlers (2020) · cites this paper as [25]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 29 · Cited by 399
- Authors
- Clayton, D. A., Griffith, C. J., Price, P., & Peters, A. C.
- Affiliations
- Cardiff Metropolitan University (GB)
- University of Wales (GB)
- ORCID
- Price, Patricia
- Venue
- International Journal of Environmental Health Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2002-03
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 25-39
- ISSN
- 0960-3123 (ISSN-L)
- 1369-1619
- OpenAlex
- W2158392095
- Cited by
- 399
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 22
- FWCI
- 12.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Environmental Health Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Cardiff Metropolitan Research Repository (Cardiff Metropolitan University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Safety and Hygiene
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Radiological and Ultrasound Technology › Occupational Health and Safety Research
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Salmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
- Keywords
- food handlers, food safety practices, food hygiene training, social cognitive theory, foodborne outbreak, barriers to behavior change, risk-based approach, self-reported practices, management culture
- MeSH terms
- Attitude to Health, Data Collection, Food Handling, Foodborne Diseases, Humans, Hygiene, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Professional Competence, Risk Factors, Organizational Culture, Food Industry
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