Skip to main content

Mark Traynor

Title: Professor

Department: Hospitality, Event and Tourism Management

College: College of Business

Curriculum Vitae

Curriculum Vitae Link

Education

  • PhD, Dublin Institute of Technology, 2013
    Major: Culinary Arts and Food Technology
    Dissertation: Innovative Food Product Development using Molecular Gastronomy: A Focus on Flavour and Sensory Evaluation

Current Scheduled Teaching

No current or future courses scheduled.

Texas Education Code 51.974 (HB 2504) requires each institution of higher education to make available to the public, a syllabus for undergraduate lecture courses offered for credit by the institution.

Previous Scheduled Teaching

No previous courses scheduled.

Texas Education Code 51.974 (HB 2504) requires each institution of higher education to make available to the public, a syllabus for undergraduate lecture courses offered for credit by the institution.

Published Intellectual Contributions

    Journal Article

  • Rahman, I., Traynor, M., Nanu, L., Tillery, H. (2025). From Buffets to Takeout: Student Perspectives on Public Health Crisis-Induced University Dining Transformations. Other. 1-28. Informa UK Limited. https://doi.org/10.1080/15428052.2025.2599862
  • Nanu, L., Rahman, I., Traynor, M., Cain, L. (2024). Something to chew on: assessing what students want from campus dining services. Young Consumers. 25 (6) 748-770. Emerald. https://doi.org/10.1108/yc-02-2024-1979
  • Traynor, M., Owens, E., O'Neill, S., Rahman, I. (2024). Restaurant resilience: A qualitative study of resilience, adaptability, and innovation of the Alabama restaurant industry during the COVID-19 pandemic. Other. 9 (4) 100583. Elsevier BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2024.100583
  • O’Neill, S., Traynor, M., Rahman, I., Lee, Y.M. (2024). Exploring Front-of-House and Back-of-House Manager Perceptions, Attitudes, and Motivations of Restaurant Food Waste Mitigation: A Qualitative Study. Sustainability. 16 (15) 6694. MDPI AG. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156694
  • Williams, R., Moazzem, M.S., Dees, J., Hayden, M., Traynor, M., Cho, S. (2023). Consumer acceptability of no added sugar pound cakes under blind and informed testing conditions. Other. 88 (11) 4677-4692. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.16773
  • Traynor, M., Bernard, S., Moreo, A., O’Neill, S. (2022). Investigating the emergence of third-party online food delivery in the U.S. restaurant industry: A grounded theory approach. International Journal of Hospitality Management. 107 103299. Elsevier BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2022.103299
  • Moreo, A., Traynor, M., Beldona, S. (2022). Food enthusiasts: A behavioral typology. Food Quality and Preference. 96 104369. Elsevier BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104369
  • Traynor, M., Cain, L., Moreo, A. (2022). Shooting for the stars: the case of an elite chef. Journal of Foodservice Business Research. 25 (1) 107-125. Informa UK Limited. https://doi.org/10.1080/15378020.2021.1924416
  • Traynor, M., Martin, D.S., Ahmad, I., Alonso, M. (2021). Investigating the Factors that Impact the Selection of Technical Ingredients in Food Manufacturing: A Mixed-Methods Study. Other. 19 (3) 268-283. Informa UK Limited. https://doi.org/10.1080/15428052.2020.1759170

    • Manuscript

  • Traynor, M., Moreo, A. (2026). From insight to implementation: a roadmap for third-party online food delivery. International Hospitality Review. Emerald Publishing Limited.
,
Overall
Summative Rating		 Challenge and
Engagement Index		 Response Rate

out of 5
out of 7		 %
of
students responded
  • Overall Summative Rating (median):
    This rating represents the combined responses of students to the four global summative items and is presented to provide an overall index of the class’s quality. Overall summative statements include the following (response options include a Likert scale ranging from 5 = Excellent, 3 = Good, and 1= Very poor):
    • The course as a whole was
    • The course content was
    • The instructor’s contribution to the course was
    • The instructor’s effectiveness in teaching the subject matter was
  • Challenge and Engagement Index:
    This rating combines student responses to several SPOT items relating to how academically challenging students found the course to be and how engaged they were. Challenge and Engagement Index items include the following (response options include a Likert scale ranging from 7 = Much higher, 4 = Average, and 1 = Much lower):
    • Do you expect your grade in this course to be
    • The intellectual challenge presented was
    • The amount of effort you put into this course was
    • The amount of effort to succeed in this course was
    • Your involvement in course (doing assignments, attending classes, etc.) was
CLOSE