Abstract Social desirability bias could affect the results of research using self-reports, like questionnaires, which are the dominant approach to explore sustainable food consumption and its drivers. Despite various methodological and statistical approaches have been suggested to counteract social desirability, their use in research about sustainable food has not been systematically reviewed before. Therefore, a systematic literature review was carried out covering 388 peer-reviewed studies. The number of papers mentioning social desirability bias steadily increased since the 1990s. However, our results indicates that the overall proportion of relevant papers discussing it is low, with most of those doing so giving no clear indication about its causes and/or consequences for data quality. Moreover, few studies provide information about the data collection process, despite well-known situational factors influencing social desirability bias. A few papers implemented methodological remedies, like anonymity or proper scaling. Statistical remedies, like social desirability scales, were found in two studies only. Our findings suggest three major improvements in survey research about sustainable food. First, a better description of the data collection process is recommended, to better identify the limitations and strengths of a specific study. Second, procedural remedies against social desirability, which are now the gold standard in other survey-based disciplines, should be used more consistently. Finally, more research is needed adopting social desirability scales, which are relatively common in other fields of research using surveys (e.g. dietary studies), as well as specialized questioning techniques for sensitive answers.

中文翻译：

---

社会需求和可持续食品研究：系统文献综述

摘要 社会期望偏差可能会影响使用自我报告的研究结果，如问卷调查，这是探索可持续食品消费及其驱动因素的主要方法。尽管已经提出了各种方法论和统计方法来抵消社会需求，但之前还没有系统地审查它们在可持续食品研究中的应用。因此，对 388 项同行评审的研究进行了系统的文献综述。自 1990 年代以来，提及社会期望偏差的论文数量稳步增加。然而，我们的结果表明，讨论它的相关论文的总体比例很低，其中大多数没有明确说明其原因和/或对数据质量的影响。而且，尽管众所周知的情境因素会影响社会期望偏差，但很少有研究提供有关数据收集过程的信息。一些论文实施了方法论补救措施，例如匿名或适当的缩放。仅在两项研究中发现了统计补救措施，如社会期望量表。我们的研究结果表明，关于可持续食品的调查研究有三项重大改进。首先，建议更好地描述数据收集过程，以更好地确定特定研究的局限性和优势。其次，应更加一致地使用针对社会意愿的程序性补救措施，这些措施现在已成为其他基于调查的学科的黄金标准。最后，需要更多的研究采用社会期望量表，这在使用调查的其他研究领域中相对常见（例如