European preferences for beef steak attributes
By G. Tonsor, Ted C. Schroeder, John A. Fox, A. Biere. 2005
165 citations recorded by the source corpus.
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/93cd8125c43b46131ee0917f1576e3fa585941d1
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
- W. Umberger
- Astrid Dannenberg
- Maria Loureiro
- N. Olynk
- G. Tonsor
- C. Wolf
- Jayson L. Lusk
- David L. Ortega
Citations in the corpus
- Effects of Label Information on Consumer Willingness-to-Pay for Food Attributes (2009, unknown): “This assumption also as sured that the WTP estimated for a particular beef attribute was normally distributed (Lusk, Roosen, and Fox 2003; Tonsor et al. 2005).”
- The dispersion and development of consumer preferences for genetically modified food — A meta-analysis (2009, methodology): “…(2003) 2002 Random Choice experiment Mail Yes America Eggs 0 Teisl et al. (2003) 2002 Random Choice experiment Mail Yes America Corn (frozen) 0 47 Tonsor et al. (2005) 2002 Shoppers Choice experiment In-person No Europe GM-fed beef 33 L Tonsor et al. (2005) 2002 Shoppers Choice experiment…”
- A choice experiment model for beef: What US consumer responses tell us about relative preferences for food safety, country-of-origin labeling and traceability (2007, result): “Similar to other studies (e.g. Lusk et al., 2003; Tonsor et al., 2005) which have used choice sets to determine consumer preferences and willingness-to-pay for credence attributes in beef, the premiums for all attributes examined in this study are large.”
- Consumer Willingness to Pay for Livestock Credence Attribute Claim Verification (2010, background): “A panel set of data is described here, in which the cross-sectional element is consumer i and the time-series component is choice scenario t (Alfnes, 2004; Tonsor et al., 2005).”
- Consumer Preferences for Animal Welfare Attributes: The Case of Gestation Crates (2009, background): “A growing amount of research suggests consumers possess heterogeneous preferences, so employing a model that allows for and evaluates preference heterogeneity is appropriate (Alfnes, 2004; Alfnes and Rickertsen, 2003; Lusk, Roosen, and Fox, 2003; Tonsor et al., 2005).”