Table 4.

Quality appraisal of quantitative studies

Study	Was a survey appropriate for the aim?	What was the response rate?	Is the sample representative of the population?	Are the measures reported objective and reliable?	Was there a justification of the sample size?	Were appropriate statistical analyses performed?	Was there evidence of any other bias?
Surveys
Arnold (2014)	Yes	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	No	Unclear	Unclear
Besley et al. (2008)	Yes	32.3 %	No	Unclear	No	Yes	Yes
Capon et al. (2015)	Yes	19–48 %	Unclear	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Cobb and Macoubrie (2004)	Yes	38–48 %	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	Yes	No
Conti et al. (2011)	Yes	51.9 %	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear
Cook and Fairweather (2007)	Yes	29.6 %	No	Yes	No	Yes	No
Farshchi et al. (2011)	Yes	Unclear	Yes	Yes	Unclear	Yes	Unclear
Groves (2013)	Yes	71 %	No	Unclear	No	Yes	Unclear
Gupta et al. (2013)	Yes	32 %	Unclear	Unclear	No	Yes	Unclear
Schnettler et al. (2013a, b)	Yes	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	Yes	Yes	Unclear
Schnettler et al. (2013a, b) neophobia	Yes	68 %	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Schnettler et al. (2014)	Yes	Unclear	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Siegrist et al. (2007)	Yes	Unclear	No	Unclear	No	Yes	Unclear
Siegrist et al. (2008)	Yes	28 %	Unclear	Unclear	No	Yes	Unclear
Siegrist et al. (2009)	Yes	43 %	Unclear	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
Stampfli et al. (2010)	Yes	41 %	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	Yes	No
Suhaimee et al. (2014)	Yes	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	No	Yes	Yes
Yue et al. (2015a, b)	Yes	86 %	No	Yes	No	Yes	Unclear
Experiments
Bieberstein et al. (2013)	Yes	Unclear	Yes	Unclear	Unclear	Yes	No
Marette et al. (2009)	Yes	Unclear	Yes	Unclear	Unclear	Yes	No
Roosen et al. (2011)	Yes	Unclear	Yes	Unclear	Unclear	Yes	No
Conjoint analysis
Casolani et al. (2015)	Yes	Unclear	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
Yue et al. (2015a, b)	Yes	97.5 %	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Unclear
Mixed methods
Handford et al. (2015)	Yes	8.67 %	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Unclear
Roosen et al. (2015)	Yes	Unclear	Unclear	Yes	No	Yes	Unclear
Simons et al. (2009)	Yes	Unclear	Yes	Unclear	No	Unclear	Unclear
Yawson and Kuzma (2010)	Yes	30 %	Unclear	Unclear	No	Unclear	Unclear