IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jagaec/v49y2017i01p139-157_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Taste Trumps Health And Safety: Incorporating Consumer Perceptions Into A Discrete Choice Experiment For Meat

Author

Listed:
  • MALONE, TREY
  • LUSK, JAYSON L.

Abstract

Consumers implicitly incorporate their perceptions of products into their decision processes, yet little research has explicitly focused on how those perceptions influence demand for meat. This study incorporates taste, health, and safety perceptions into a discrete choice experiment for meat products at a grocery store. Our results indicate that taste is the most important perception as a 1-unit increase in the perceived tastiness (on a −5 to +5 scale) of a food product leads to a $0.60 increase in willingness to pay, whereas equivalent increases in perceived health and safety lead to $0.31 and $0.21 increases, respectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Malone, Trey & Lusk, Jayson L., 2017. "Taste Trumps Health And Safety: Incorporating Consumer Perceptions Into A Discrete Choice Experiment For Meat," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(1), pages 139-157, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jagaec:v:49:y:2017:i:01:p:139-157_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S107407081600033X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Binkley, James K. & Young, Jeffrey S., 2022. "Deficient Dietary Behavior in Low-Income Americans: Assessing the Role of Diet Costs," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322055, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Trey Malone & Antonios M. Koumpias & Per L. Bylund, 2019. "Entrepreneurial response to interstate regulatory competition: evidence from a behavioral discrete choice experiment," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 172-192, April.
    3. Shi, Longzhong & Chen, Xuan & Chen, Bo & Qiu, Jingran & Li, Li, 2021. "Assessing Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Covid-19-tested Food Labels," 2021 ASAE 10th International Conference (Virtual), January 11-13, Beijing, China 329403, Asian Society of Agricultural Economists (ASAE).
    4. Neill, Clinton L. & Holcomb, Rodney B., 2019. "Does a food safety label matter? Consumer heterogeneity and fresh produce risk perceptions under the Food Safety Modernization Act," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 7-14.
    5. Melstrom, Richard T., 2022. "Residential demand for sediment remediation to restore water quality: Evidence from Milwaukee," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    6. Adam Dvir, 2022. "Is mass media an effective channel for conveying nutritional information? Welfare implications of the WHO classification of processed meats as carcinogenic on consumers in Israel," French Stata Users' Group Meetings 2022 21, Stata Users Group.
    7. Costanigro, Marco & Scozzafava, Gabriele & Casini, Leonardo, 2019. "Vertical differentiation via multi-tier geographical indications and the consumer perception of quality: The case of Chianti wines," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 246-259.
    8. Young, Jeffrey S., 2021. "Measuring palatability as a linear combination of nutrient levels in food items," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    9. Yang Yang & Jill E. Hobbs, 2020. "Food values and heterogeneous consumer responses to nanotechnology," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(3), pages 289-313, September.
    10. Longzhong Shi & Xuan Chen & Bo Chen, 2023. "Covid‐19‐tested food labels," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 71(2), pages 203-230, June.
    11. Gregory Howard & Brian E. Roe & Matthew G. Interis & Jay Martin, 2020. "Addressing Attribute Value Substitution in Discrete Choice Experiments to Avoid Unintended Consequences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(4), pages 813-838, December.
    12. Melstrom, Richard T., 2022. "Residential demand for sediment remediation to restore water quality: Evidence from Milwaukee," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    13. Zhai, Qianqian & Kassas, Bachir & Zhao, Shuoli & Chen, Lijun & Chen, Chao, 2020. "Investigating Preference Inconsistencies in Incentive Structures that Account for House Money Effects," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304584, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Neuhofer, Zachary T. & Lusk, Jayson L., 2021. "Decomposing the Value of Food Labels on Chicken," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(2), pages 229-245, May.
    15. Marco Costanigro & Yuko Onozaka, 2020. "A Belief‐Preference Model of Choice for Experience and Credence Goods," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(1), pages 70-95, February.
    16. Kilders, Valerie & Lineback, Caitlinn & Malone, Trey & Caputo, Vincenzina & McKendree, Melissa G.S., 2022. "The Tart Cherry Market and Purchasing Preferences in the United States," Staff Paper Series 317810, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    17. Roe, Brian E. & Interis, Matthew G. & Howard, Gregory E., 2018. "Utilizing Subjective Beliefs in Stated Preference Models: Issues and Solutions," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274017, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Elizabeth S. Byrd & Nicole J. Olynk Widmar & Benjamin M. Gramig, 2018. "Presentation matters: Number of attributes presented impacts estimated preferences," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 377-389, March.
    19. Biancamaria Torquati & Tiziano Tempesta & Daniel Vecchiato & Sonia Venanzi, 2018. "Tasty or Sustainable? The Effect of Product Sensory Experience on a Sustainable New Food Product: An Application of Discrete Choice Experiments on Chianina Tinned Beef," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, August.
    20. Shalynn Sumrow & Darren Hudson & Oscar Sarasty & Carlos Carpio & Christy Bratcher, 2024. "Consumer preferences for worker and supply chain risk mitigation in the beef supply chain in response to COVID‐19 pandemic," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(1), pages 299-315, January.
    21. Drugova, Tatiana & Curtis, Kynda R., 2023. "Research Report: Do Consumer Beliefs Impact Their Preferences for Organic Specialty Baked Goods?," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 54(1), March.
    22. Áron Török & Ching-Hua Yeh & Davide Menozzi & Péter Balogh & Péter Czine, 2023. "Consumers' preferences for processed meat: a best–worst scaling approach in three European countries," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 11(1), pages 1-24, December.
    23. Chloe S McCallum & Simone Cerroni & Daniel Derbyshire & W George Hutchinson & Rodolfo M Nayga, 2022. "Consumers’ responses to food fraud risks: an economic experiment," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(4), pages 942-969.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jagaec:v:49:y:2017:i:01:p:139-157_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/aae .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.