Self‐reported and observed behavior of primary meal preparers and adolescents during preparation of frozen, uncooked, breaded chicken products
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of the present study was to observe the preparation practices of both adult and young consumers using frozen, uncooked, breaded chicken products, which were previously involved in outbreaks linked to consumer mishandling. The study also sought to observe behaviors of adolescents as home food preparers. Finally, the study aimed to compare food handler behaviors with those prescribed on product labels. Design/methodology/approach: The study sought, through video observation and self‐report surveys, to determine if differences exist between consumers' intent and actual behavior. Findings: A survey study of consumer reactions to safe food‐handling labels on raw meat and poultry products suggested that instructions for safe handling found on labels had only limited influence on consumer practices. The labels studied by these researchers were found on the packaging of chicken products examined in the current study alongside step‐by‐step cooking instructions. Observational techniques, as mentioned above, provide a different perception of consumer behaviors. Originality/value: This paper finds areas that have not been studied in previous observational research and is an excellent addition to existing literature.
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?
Reliance on self-reported practices makes findings susceptible to social desirability and recall bias, potentially resulting in an overly optimistic assessment of food safety knowledge and behaviours compared with alternative approaches.
“reliance on self-reported practices makes findings susceptible to social desirability and recall bias [76,77], potentially resulting in an overly optimistic assessment of food safety knowledge, and behaviours compared with alternative approaches [27].”
From Food Safety Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices (KAP) of Urban Consumers in Low-Income and Lower-Middle-Income Countries (LLMICs): A Scoping Review (2026) · cites this paper as [76]
Cites
Comparison between Self-Reported and Observed Food Handling Behaviors among Latinas
Dharod, J. M., Pérez-Escamilla, R., Paciello, S., Bermúdez-Millán, A., Venkitanarayanan, K., & Damio, G. (2007) · Journal of Food Protection · doi:10.4315/0362-028x-70.8.1927 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Food safety education initiative to increase consumer use of food thermometers in the United States
McCurdy, S. M., Takeuchi, M. T., Edwards, Z. M., Edlefsen, M., Kang, D., Elaine Mayes, V., & Hillers, V. N. (2006) · British Food Journal · doi:10.1108/00070700610688403 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Insfran-Rivarola, A., Tlapa, D., Limon-Romero, J., Baez-Lopez, Y., Miranda-Ackerman, M., Arredondo-Soto, K., & Ontiveros, S. (2020) · Foods · doi:10.3390/foods9091169 · Cited by 160 · see citing works
Food handling behaviors observed in consumers when cooking poultry and eggs
Maughan, C., Chambers, E., Godwin, S., Chambers, D., Cates, S., & Koppel, K. (2016) · Journal of Food Protection · doi:10.4315/0362-028x.jfp-15-311 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Feng, Y., & Bruhn, C. M. (2019) · Journal of Food Protection · doi:10.4315/0362-028x.jfp-18-245 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Meat thermometer usage amongst European and north American consumers: a scoping review
Elshahat, S., Woodside, J. V., & McKinley, M. C. (2019) · Food Control · doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2019.06.018 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Choudhury, S., Medina-Lara, A., Bi, A. Z., Ricarte, P., Morrish, N., & Veettil, P. C. (2026) · Foods · doi:10.3390/foods15081381 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“In particular, reliance on self-reported practices makes findings susceptible to social desirability and recall bias [76,77], potentially resulting in an overly optimistic assessment of food safety knowledge, and behaviours compared with alternative approaches [27].”
- Authors
- DeDonder, S., Jacob, C. J., Surgeoner, B. V., Chapman, B., Phebus, R., & Powell, D. A.
- Affiliations
- Kansas State University (US)
- ORCID
- Phebus, Randall
- Venue
- British Food Journal
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2009-09-05
- Volume
- 111
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 915-929
- ISSN
- 0007-070X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2094717570
- Cited by
- 43
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- British Food Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Safety and Hygiene
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Supply Chain Traceability
- Keywords
- home food preparation, food handler behavior, food safety labels, culinary education, self-reported 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
