Predicting consumer healthy choices regarding type 1 wheat flour

Abstract

Purpose

Healthy and safety food issues are more and more becoming the purchasing process core of conscious consumer. “Type 1” wheat flour means higher protein and ash content. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the attributes usually referred to the characteristics of wheat flour known to consumers and at implementing a predictive model of purchasing that allows to make correct decisions without the necessary experience of a real human expert.

Design/methodology/approach

In order to investigate the research aims of the paper, an online survey was carried out and conducted by means of the Google Forms in the detection time January-April 2016. The online survey collected responses from 467 Italian respondents asked to give feedback about their buying habits of various types of flour. The responses were analyzed through a data mining approach. This paper implements predictive analytics to create a statistical model of future behavior by means of a machine learning algorithms.

Findings

In line with recent healthy and dynamic trends in the food industry, conscious consumer seems to be willing to pay a price for “type 1” wheat flour that is four times higher than the price related to the basic types of wheat flour.

Social implications

Consumer seems not to know well the “type 1” wheat flour and its healthy characteristics; then, it should be crucial to implement promotional strategies and marketing hand in hand. Promotion can be a key element in putting across the health benefits of special kinds of wheat flour.

Originality/value

Highlighting health issues about the “type 1” wheat flour gives insights and sheds some light on the crucial need of changing eating and purchasing behavior. Then, originality of this paper can be found in the used predictive algorithm of the artificial intelligence.

Citation

Fiore, M., Gallo, C., Tsoukatos, E. and La Sala, P. (2017), "Predicting consumer healthy choices regarding type 1 wheat flour", British Food Journal, Vol. 119 No. 11, pp. 2388-2405. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-04-2017-0200