Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32982000›Full record

ArticlePersonality and individual differences2021

"Do I have enough food?" How need for cognitive closure and gender impact stockpiling and food waste during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-national study in India and the United States of America.

Ambra Brizi, Alessandro Biraglia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Personality and individual differences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Waste management beyond the COVID-19 pandemic: Bibliometric and text mining analyses.Gondwana research : international geoscience journal · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ambra BriziLeeds University Business School, University of Leeds, United Kingdom.
Alessandro BiragliaLeeds University Business School, University of Leeds, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Food waste is considered to be one of the biggest issues affecting individuals around the globe. The COVID-19 pandemic, with the consequent lockdown processes, has recently triggered individuals to stockpile foodstuffs. Recent data shows, however, that individuals have not consumed a good proportion of the stockpiled food, resulting in increasing amounts of products ending up wasted. Using a cross-national survey conducted in the United States and India, we investigate how individuals' levels of need for cognitive closure (NFC) relate to food stockpiling and waste during the COVID-19 pandemic. Through a sequential mediation model, we show how individuals high in NFC did not perceive to have enough food at home, ending up buying more food than usual and, eventually, wasting more. Individuals' gender and country of residence moderate such phenomenon, with the effect being more pronounced among Indian (rather than American) women. We discuss how gender roles in different countries can correlate with the stockpiling and food waste processes. We conclude the manuscript by suggesting how public communication and policy making could develop targeted programs to mitigate such issues.

Indexed as

COVID-19Cross-national surveyFood wasteGenderNeed for cognitive closure

Identifiers

PMID32982000
PMCPMC7501171

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.