東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Consumer preferences for fat content...

Wilson, Natalie Nichol.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Consumer preferences for fat content in ground beef.

Record Type:	Language materials, printed : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Consumer preferences for fat content in ground beef./
Author:	Wilson, Natalie Nichol.
Description:	65 p.
Notes:	Adviser: Jayson Lusk.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International46-05.
Subject:	Agriculture, Food Science and Technology. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=1452872
ISBN:	9780549526469

Consumer preferences for fat content in ground beef.
Wilson, Natalie Nichol.

Consumer preferences for fat content in ground beef. - 65 p.

Adviser: Jayson Lusk.

Thesis (M.S.)--Oklahoma State University, 2007.

Beef is considered less healthy than its two closest competitors: pork and poultry. This has led to research to determine ways to improve healthiness by altering the type and content of fat in beef products. There remains a great deal of uncertainty about the value consumers place on these nutritional improvements, which has slowed the development and marketing of such products.

ISBN: 9780549526469Subjects--Topical Terms:

1017813
Agriculture, Food Science and Technology.

Consumer preferences for fat content in ground beef.
LDR:03008nam 2200325 a 45 001 954895
005 20110622
008 110622s2007 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9780549526469
035 $a (UMI)AAI1452872
035 $a AAI1452872
040 $a UMI $c UMI
100 1 $a Wilson, Natalie Nichol. $3 1278361
245 1 0 $a Consumer preferences for fat content in ground beef.
300 $a 65 p.
500 $a Adviser: Jayson Lusk.
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 46-05, page: .
502 $a Thesis (M.S.)--Oklahoma State University, 2007.
520 $a Beef is considered less healthy than its two closest competitors: pork and poultry. This has led to research to determine ways to improve healthiness by altering the type and content of fat in beef products. There remains a great deal of uncertainty about the value consumers place on these nutritional improvements, which has slowed the development and marketing of such products.
520 $a A survey was developed to determine consumers' preferences for fat content in ground beef and to identify how consumers would most like the healthiness of fat content to be improved. The survey was mailed to a random sample of 2,000 individuals throughout the United States. Survey responses to choice-experiment question were used to define consumers' utility for ground beef as a function of five ground beef attributes: percent lean, omega 6 to omega 3 fatty acid ratio, percent saturated fat, percent conjugated linoleic acid, and product price. Responses to a series of best-worst questions were used to identify which methods consumers most preferred to improve fat content: cattle fed a diet primarily consisting of grass or green leafy hay, supplement with fish meal, supplement with flaxseed oil, use genetic testing to breed only cattle with improved fatty acid content, sort existing cattle and label those with improved fatty acid content or clone cattle with improved fatty acid content. A second series of best-worst questions were used to identify which attributes of ground beef are most important to consumers when making purchase decisions: expiration date, price, food safety, total amount of fat, package size and fatty acid composition.
520 $a Findings and conclusions. Results reveal that consumers are willing to pay for beef with lower amounts of saturated fat and lower omega 6:3 ratios. Feeding a diet high in grass is the most preferred method to improve the fat content while the least desirable is cloning cattle. Finally, the most important attribute to consumers when purchasing ground beef is food safety while package size is the least important.
590 $a School code: 0664.
650 4 $a Agriculture, Food Science and Technology. $3 1017813
650 4 $a Economics, Agricultural. $3 626648
690 $a 0359
690 $a 0503
710 2 $a Oklahoma State University. $b Agricultural Economics. $3 1266066
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 46-05.
790 $a 0664
790 1 0 $a Lusk, Jayson, $e advisor
790 1 0 $a Norwood, Bailey $e committee member
790 1 0 $a VanOverbeke, Deb $e committee member
791 $a M.S.
792 $a 2007
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=1452872