ReviewFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Measurement and Modeling of Sustainable Food Choice and Purchasing Behavior: A Systematic Review of Methods and Models.
Review in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite decades of methodological sophistication, research on sustainable food behavior remains critically limited in predicting actual purchases. This study aims to examine how methodological fragmentation across psychometric, econometric, and behavioral approaches affects the predictive validity of sustainable food choice and purchasing behavior. This integrative systematic review of 62 empirical studies across psychometric validation, discrete choice experiments (DCEs), trust and cognitive biases, and objective behavioral measurement diagnoses the structural disarticulation between these traditions as the primary cause of limited predictive validity. Findings reveal a pronounced inversion of the evidence hierarchy: while self-report studies report moderate attitude-behavior correlations (β ≈ 0.40-0.50, self-report), the only long-term study using objective scanner data demonstrates that this relationship collapses to a virtually null effect (β = 0.022), representing a 95.6% decay in predictive capacity. Psychometric instruments demonstrate strong structural validity but lack ecological validation against actual purchases. DCEs have evolved econometrically (from MNL to GMNL models), yet remain isolated from psychological theory and real-world validation. Critically, no reviewed study integrated validated scales, a DCE, and objective behavioral data within a single design. Key moderators-skepticism, halo effects, and affective heuristics-are systematically underoperationalized. To overcome this impasse, we propose Hybrid Choice Models (HCM) as the central tool to formally articulate latent attitudes, stated preferences, and observed behavior, enabling cumulative evidence to inform policy and market strategies with greater predictive accuracy. These findings indicate that predictive advances depend on integrating measurement paradigms to achieve ecologically valid and policy-relevant models of sustainable consumer behavior.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.