IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/jlofdr/240769.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Health Consciousness and Consumer Preferences for Holiday Turkey Attributes

Author

Listed:
  • Widmar, Nicole J. Olynk
  • Byrd, Elizabeth S.
  • Wolf, Christopher A.
  • Acharya, Lalatendu

Abstract

An online survey of 620 respondents was utilized to elicit consumer preferences for six holiday turkey attributes (price, weight, antibiotic free, local, pasture access, and brand) related to aspects of food purchasing, including healthfulness, food safety, and treatment of animals. To explore possible relationships in consumer perceptions of holiday turkey attributes and lifestyle factors, respondents were asked about their health consciousness. Those who indicated they would consume turkey for one or more holiday meal were generally rated more health conscious. Price was the most important attribute and the preference share for price was negatively correlated with health consciousness.

Suggested Citation

  • Widmar, Nicole J. Olynk & Byrd, Elizabeth S. & Wolf, Christopher A. & Acharya, Lalatendu, 2016. "Health Consciousness and Consumer Preferences for Holiday Turkey Attributes," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 47(2), pages 1-15, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:jlofdr:240769
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.240769
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/240769/files/5_Widmar_128.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.240769?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Olynk, Nicole J. & Tonsor, Glynn T. & Wolf, Christopher A., 2010. "Verifying Credence Attributes in Livestock Production," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 42(3), pages 1-14, August.
    2. Maynard, Leigh J. & Burdine, Kenneth H. & Meyer, A. Lee, 2003. "Market Potential for Locally Produced Meat Products," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 34(2), pages 1-12, July.
    3. DeGraba, Patrick, 2006. "The loss leader is a turkey: Targeted discounts from multi-product competitors," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 613-628, May.
    4. Brian C. Briggeman & Jayson L. Lusk, 2011. "Preferences for fairness and equity in the food system," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 38(1), pages 1-29, March.
    5. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    6. Tonsor, Glynn T. & Wolf, Christopher & Olynk, Nicole, 2009. "Consumer voting and demand behavior regarding swine gestation crates," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 492-498, December.
    7. Flynn, Terry N. & Louviere, Jordan J. & Peters, Tim J. & Coast, Joanna, 2007. "Best-worst scaling: What it can do for health care research and how to do it," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 171-189, January.
    8. Wolf, Christopher A. & Tonsor, Glynn T., 2013. "Dairy Farmer Policy Preferences," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 1-15, August.
    9. Adam Drucker, 2007. "Measuring Heterogeneous Preferences for Cattle Traits among Cattle-Keeping Households in East Africa," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(4), pages 1005-1019.
    10. Lizzy Pope & Andrew S Hanks & David R Just & Brian Wansink, 2014. "New Year’s Res-Illusions: Food Shopping in the New Year Competes with Healthy Intentions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-7, December.
    11. Jekanowski, Mark D. & Williams, Daniel R., II & Schiek, William A., 2000. "Consumers' Willingness To Purchase Locally Produced Agricultural Products: An Analysis Of An Indiana Survey," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 29(1), pages 1-11, April.
    12. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    13. Office of Health Economics, 2007. "The Economics of Health Care," For School 001490, Office of Health Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Andrew M. Johnson & Tahirou Abdoulaye & Bamikole Ayedun & Joan R. Fulton & Nicole J. Olynk Widmar & Akande Adebowale & Ranajit Bandyopadhyay & Victor Manyong, 2020. "Willingness to pay of Nigerian poultry producers and feed millers for aflatoxin‐safe maize," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(2), pages 299-317, April.
    2. Bir, Courtney & Wolf, Christopher A. & Widmar, Nicole Olynk, 2020. "Dog and Cat Owner Demand for Veterinary Service Payment Plans," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 46(2), August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wolf, Christopher A. & Tonsor, Glynn T., 2012. "Dairy Farmer Preferences for 2012 Farm Bill," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124866, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Muunda, Emmanuel & Mtimet, Nadhem & Schneider, Franziska & Wanyoike, Francis & Dominguez-Salas, Paula & Alonso, Silvia, 2021. "Could the new dairy policy affect milk allocation to infants in Kenya? A best-worst scaling approach," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    3. Wolf, Christopher A. & Tonsor, Glynn T., 2013. "Dairy Farmer Policy Preferences," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 1-15, August.
    4. Petrolia, Daniel & Interis, Matthew & Hwang, Joonghyun, 2015. "Single-Choice, Repeated-Choice, and Best-Worst Elicitation Formats: Do Results Differ and by How Much?," Working Papers 212479, Mississippi State University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    5. Lai, John & Olynk Widmar, Nicole J. & Gunderson, Michael A. & Widmar, David A. & Ortega, David L., 2018. "Prioritization of farm success factors by commercial farm managers," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(6), July.
    6. Blemings, Benjamin & Zhang, Peilu & Neill, Clinton L., 2023. "Where is the value? The impacts of sow gestation crate laws on pork supply and consumer value perceptions," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    7. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Olynk, Nicole J., 2011. "Modeling heterogeneity in consumer preferences for select food safety attributes in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 318-324, April.
    8. Yan, Zhen & Zhou, Jie-hong, 2015. "Measuring consumer heterogeneous preferences for pork traits under media reports: choice experiment in sixteen traceability pilot cities, China," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212609, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Suprehatin, By & Umberger, Wendy J. & Yi, Dale & Stringer, Randy & Minot, Nicholas, 2015. "Can Understanding Indonesian Farmers’ Preferences for Crop Attributes Encourage their Adoption of High Value Crops?," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212057, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Lancsar, Emily & Louviere, Jordan & Flynn, Terry, 2007. "Several methods to investigate relative attribute impact in stated preference experiments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(8), pages 1738-1753, April.
    11. Wu, Linhai & Wang, Shuxian & Zhu, Dian & Hu, Wuyang & Wang, Hongsha, 2015. "Chinese consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for traceable food quality and safety attributes: The case of pork," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 121-136.
    12. Carnegie, Rachel & Wang, Holly & Widmar, Nicole & Ortega, David, 2014. "Consumer Preferences for Quality and Safety Attributes of Duck in Restaurant Entrees: Is China A Viable Market for The U.S. Duck Industry?," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170717, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. McKendree, Melissa G.S. & Tonsor, Glynn T. & Wolf, Christopher A., 2015. "Similarities and Differences of Animal Welfare Perceptions between U.S. Cow-Calf Producers and the Public," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205433, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Richartz, P. Christoph & Abdulai, Awudu & Kornher, Lukas, 2020. "Attribute Non Attendance and Consumer Preferences for Online Food Products in Germany," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(1), March.
    15. Confraria, João & Ribeiro, Tiago & Vasconcelos, Helder, 2017. "Analysis of consumer preferences for mobile telecom plans using a discrete choice experiment," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 157-169.
    16. Tonsor, Glynn T. & Olynk, Nicole & Wolf, Christopher, 2009. "Consumer Preferences for Animal Welfare Attributes: The Case of Gestation Crates," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(3), pages 713-730, December.
    17. Jae Eun You & Jong Woo Choi, 2022. "An analysis of food culture and technology acceptance for youth: Using a choice experiment and a latent class model," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(2), pages 510-522, March.
    18. Denise Doiron & Jane Hall & Patricia Kenny & Deborah J. Street, 2014. "Job preferences of students and new graduates in nursing," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(9), pages 924-939, March.
    19. Schreiner, Julia Anette, 2018. "Saving the breeds: German Farmers’ preferences for Endangered Dairy Breed conservation programs," 2018 International European Forum (163rd EAAE Seminar), February 5-9, 2018, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 276866, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    20. Catalina M. Torres & Sergio Colombo & Nick Hanley, 2014. "Incorrectly accounting for preference heterogeneity in choice experiments: what are the implications for welfare measurement?," DEA Working Papers 65, Universitat de les Illes Balears, Departament d'Economía Aplicada.

    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:ags:jlofdr:240769. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fdrssea.html .

    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.