Purpose

The study aims to compare survey recruitment rates between Facebook, Twitter and Qualtrics and to assess the impact of recruitment method on estimates of energy content, food safety, carbon footprint and animal welfare across 29 foods.

Design/methodology/approach

Two versions of an online survey were developed on the citizen science platform, Zooniverse. The surveys explored citizen estimations of energy density (kcal) or carbon footprint (Co₂) and food safety or animal welfare of 29 commonly eaten foods. Survey recruitment was conducted via paid promotions on Twitter and Facebook and via paid respondent invites on Qualtrics. The study included approximately 500 participants (Facebook, N˜11 (ratings 358), Twitter, N˜85 (ratings 2,184), Qualtrics, N = 398 (ratings 11,910)). Kruskal–Wallis and Chi-square analyses compared citizen estimations with validated values and assessed the impact of the variables on estimations.

Findings

Citizens were unable to accurately estimate carbon footprint and energy content, with most citizens overestimating values. Citizen estimates were most accurate for meat products. Qualtrics was the most successful recruitment method for the online survey. Citizen estimates between platforms were significantly different, suggesting that Facebook and Twitter may not be suitable recruitment methods for citizen online surveys.

Practical implications

Qualtrics was the favourable platform for survey recruitment. However, estimates across all recruitment platforms were poor. As paid recruitment methods such as Qualtrics are costly, the authors recommend continued examination of the social media environment to develop appropriate, affordable and timely online recruitment strategies for citizen science.

Originality/value

The findings indicate that citizens are unable to accurately estimate the carbon footprint and energy content of foods suggesting a focus on consumer education is needed to enable consumers to move towards more sustainable and healthy diets. Essential if we are to meet the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals of zero hunger, good health and wellbeing and responsible consumption and production. The study highlights the utility of Zooniverse for assessing citizen estimates of carbon footprint, energy content, animal welfare and safety of foods.

中文翻译：

---

让公民参与可持续发展研究：比较招募问卷和Facebook，Twitter和质量指标之间的回应

目的

该研究旨在比较Facebook，Twitter和Qualtrics之间的调查招聘率，并评估招聘方法对29种食品的能量含量，食品安全，碳足迹和动物福利估算的影响。

设计/方法/方法

在公民科学平台Zooniverse上开发了两种版本的在线调查。这些调查探索了市民对29种常用食品的能量密度（kcal）或碳足迹（Co ₂）以及食品安全或动物福利的估计。通过Twitter和Facebook上的付费促销活动以及Qualtrics上的付费受访者邀请进行调查招聘。该研究包括大约500参与者（脸谱，Ñ〜11（评分358），微博Ñ〜85（评分2184），Qualtrics，Ñ  = 398（评分11910））。Kruskal–Wallis和卡方分析将市民的估计值与经过验证的值进行了比较，并评估了变量对估计值的影响。

发现

公民无法准确估计碳足迹和能源含量，大多数公民高估了价值。市民对肉制品的估计最准确。Qualtrics是在线调查中最成功的招聘方法。平台之间的公民估计差异很大，这表明Facebook和Twitter可能不是适合公民在线调查的招聘方法。

实际影响

Qualtrics是进行调查招聘的有利平台。但是，所有招聘平台的估计值都很低。由于诸如Qualtrics之类的付费招聘方法成本很高，因此作者建议继续检查社交媒体环境，以开发适用于公民科学的适当，负担得起且及时的在线招聘策略。

创意/价值

调查结果表明，公民无法准确估计食品的碳足迹和能量含量，这表明需要关注消费者教育，以使消费者朝着更可持续，更健康的饮食方向发展。如果我们要实现零饥饿，良好健康和福祉以及负责任的消费和生产的2030年可持续发展目标，这一点至关重要。该研究强调了人畜共患病在评估公民对碳足迹，能量含量，动物福利和食品安全性的估计中的实用性。