{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021702838063439065, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009460211463550361, 'mean_word_length': 5.421428571428572, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Consumer preferences for and beliefs about slow growth chicken

ABSTRACT Improvements in genetics, feed, and housing have dramatically reduced the time required for broilers to reach market weight. However, some advocacy organizations have argued that the improvements in productivity have been accompanied by reductions in animal welfare and meat quality, prompting retailers to consider policies that either set a minimum number of days of production or require slower‐growing heritage breeds. The overriding purpose of this project is to determine the market potential and consumer willingness‐to‐pay for chicken breast with different labels, with primary focus on slow growth labels. A national survey of over 2,000 US chicken consumers was conducted. A choice experiment, which simulates retail purchases, was included to compare slow growth chicken breast demand for consumers exposed to different types of information and who made choices in the presence or absence of brands. Willingness‐to‐pay for slow growth chicken, and importance of the attribute in consumer choice, is sensitive to the information provided and is generally lower in importance than other labels, except when consumers are provided pro slow growth information. There are multiple market segments consisting of consumers with distinct preferences for chicken breast attributes. Depending on the treatment in question, 30 to 40% of consumers are insensitive to price changes. If presented with a pairwise choice between slow growth chicken priced at a $0.72/lb premium, an estimated extra cost of slow growth, and an unlabeled chicken breast, slow growth is projected to be chosen by 37, 48, and 35% of respondents in the no added information, pro slow growth, and anti slow growth information conditions, respectively.