Food neophobia, food choice and the details of cultured meat acceptance

Unfamiliar familiarity: A scoping review on the role of familiarity in consumer acceptance of cultivated meat

The potential introduction of cultivated meat products to the market, framed as sustainable alternative to conventional animal-source foods, underscores the need to examine psychological barriers and predisposing factors influencing consumer acceptance. Familiarity is often considered a facilitating factor, based on the premise that higher familiarity with cultivated meat is associated with greater acceptance. However, evidence remains contradictory and poorly integrated. This review examines and organizes the literature on familiarity with cultivated meat and its influence on consumer acceptance. A scoping review of peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted on June 7, 2024, following PRISMA-ScR and Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. Comprehensive searches across Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and PsycInfo included no restrictions on participant type, geographic location, social and cultural contexts, language, or publication time. 63 articles were analyzed to examine (i) definitions of familiarity, (ii) methodologies measuring familiarity with cultivated meat, and (iii) evidence regarding its influence on consumer acceptance of cultivated meat. Results indicate that current research on familiarity is largely based on non-representative samples, with data recency limitations, and inconsistent operationalization. Familiarity is often conflated with the related yet distinct constructs of awareness and knowledge, revealing a lack of clarity in literature. The review also identified various approaches for assessing familiarity, all lacking psychometric rigor, hindering replicability and comparability of findings. This review highlights the need for further research to clarify the theoretical and operational definition of familiarity and its role in consumer acceptance of cultivated meat.

Are All Cultured Foods Created Equal? Exploring Consumer Reactions to Sustainable Alternatives for Climate-Friendly Diets

The devastating environmental impact of traditional agricultural practices has ignited interest in cellular agriculture-a novel method of sampling cells from living source organisms and cultivating them in a controlled laboratory environment to produce a food product. Although research and development of cultured foods is rapidly increasing, little is known about consumers' perceptions of cultured foods beyond an exemplar product-cultured meat. This study provides a first gauge of consumers' perceptions and categorization of cultured-food products from different cell sources, and a comparative assessment of the psychological barriers to their acceptance. In a representative sample of N = 302 UK-based adults, the study explores the implicit categorization and acceptance of 16 cultured food products, including cultured plants (e.g., cacao), cultured non-flesh animal-sourced foods (e.g., milk), cultured aquatic animal-flesh (e.g., fish), and cultured terrestrial animal-flesh (e.g., beef). Results revealed that consumers implicitly categorize cultured foods into two broad groups: (1) cultured meat and (2) cultured non-meat. The study demonstrated that common acceptance barriers associated with cultured meat-disgust and perceived unnaturalness-were substantially more pronounced for cultured meat products than for cultured non-meat products. While experiencing disgust toward both cultured meat and non-meat foods was strongly associated with reduced willingness to try these foods, perceived unnaturalness was only weakly associated with willingness to try cultured food products. Study findings suggest that consumers do not perceive all cultured food products as equal, highlighting a timely opportunity for scholars to examine the distinct factors motivating sustainability through cultured-food acceptance.

Review: Will "cultured meat" transform our food system towards more sustainability?

Our agri-food system today should provide enough healthy food of good quality for the growing human population. However, it should also preserve natural resources and better protect livestock. In this context, some FoodTech companies are developing a disruptive approach: cell culture for in vitro food production of "meat" but this technology is still at the research and development stage. This article will highlight its development, the technologies used and the stakeholders involved (Part 1), its potential environmental impacts (Part 2) but also regulatory, social and ethical issues (Part 3). This article aims to shed light throughout the manuscript on two major controversies related to "cultured meat". The first controversy is related to its ethical aspects, which includes different points: its potential to reduce animal suffering and therefore to improve animal welfare, the future values of our society, and a trend towards food artificialisation. The second controversy includes environmental, health and nutritional issues, in relation to the characteristics and quality of "cultured meat" with an important question: should we call it meat? These two controversies act in interaction in association with related societal, legal and consequently political issues. Answers to the various questions depend on the different visions of the World by stakeholders, consumers and citizens. Some of them argue for a moderate or a strong reduction in livestock farming, or even the abolition of livestock farming perceived as an exploitation of farm animals. Others just want a reduction of the current much criticised intensive/industrial model. Compared with other potential sustainable solutions to be implemented such as reduction of food losses and waste, new food consumption habits with less proteins of animal sources, sustainable intensification, development of agroecological livestock production, or the development of the market for other meat substitutes (proteins from plants, mycoproteins, algae, insects, etc.), "cultured meat" has an uncertain future.

Environmental Impact of Meat Protein Substitutes: A Mini-Review

The expansion of alternative food industries, including cultured meat, is often promoted as a strategy to reduce environmental pollution, particularly greenhouse gas emissions. However, comprehensive data on the environmental impacts of these industries remains limited. This study examines the environmental impacts of traditional meat and meat substitute production, highlighting their respective advantages and disadvantages. Our findings indicate that meat substitute production generally has a lower environmental impact compared to traditional livestock farming. However, it is challenging to quantify the extent to which meat substitutes can reduce the environmental impacts of traditional livestock products, as both sectors produce different pollution measurements depending on the criteria used. Moreover, the growth of the meat substitute market has been significantly smaller compared to that of the traditional livestock products market, limiting the availability of accurate data on the environmental impacts of meat substitute production. Therefore, assumptions that the meat substitute market will eventually surpass the traditional livestock market and reduce environmental pollution require caution. Continuous and in-depth research is crucial to fully understand the long-term environmental impacts of meat substitutes. Furthermore, enhancing the quality of alternative meat substitutes should be prioritized to increase their overall acceptability and facilitate technological advancements in alternative protein production before it becomes a sustainable food production system.

Attitudes toward artificial meat in Arab countries

In development for almost 20 years, artificial meat (also known as "cell-based meat," "cell-cultured meat," "cultured meat," "cultivated meat," "in vitro meat" and "lab-grown meat") is the most striking example of cellular agriculture. This research aims to study Arab consumers' attitudes toward artificial meat, which is a topic of great interest to scientists and the media. An online survey was conducted with 1025 participants revealed that 17% consider artificial meat to be promising and acceptable. Over 40% would be willing to try this novel product, whereas 36% expressed reluctance and 22.7% were unsure. Among non-hesitant respondents, about 60% of all participants would be willing to eat artificial meat on a regular basis, particularly in restaurants (16.2%), at home (27.6%), and/or in ready-made meals (33.9%). Nevertheless, the majority of participants (55%) indicated a willingness to pay (WTP) less or much less (or even nothing at all) for artificial meat in comparison to conventional meat. A notable 27% of participants expressed a WTP the same price for artificial meat as for conventional meat. Conversely, only 14% of them indicated a WTP more for artificial meat. Income, gender, and age were the most important predictors of consumer acceptance. Young and middle-aged men and those with the highest monthly income are most likely to accept artificial meat. These are the consumers most likely to be targeted by those marketing artificial meat in Arabic-speaking countries. PRACTICAL APPLICATION: The demographic groups most likely to accept artificial or cell-based meat in Arab countries are young and middle-aged men and those with the highest monthly incomes. These are the consumers most likely to be targeted by those attempting to market artificial meat in Arabic-speaking countries. Consequently, the results of our study are directly relevant to understanding the potential approaches (and challenges) to selling artificial meat in this context.

Developing Food Consumer Attitudes towards Ionizing Radiation and Genetic Modification

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

This study investigates consumer perceptions and acceptance of ionizing radiation (IoR) as a perishable food stabilisation technology. Consumers' preferences influence the success of emerging food technologies. Therefore, a comprehensive understanding of consumers' behavioural responses and their development over time is essential.

METHODS

This research employs a mixed-methods approach, surveying 313 young adults in New Zealand on their views of both irradiated (IoR) and genetically modified (GM) highly perishable foods. This study explored both participants' attitudes towards these two technologies and also their willingness to consume these foods.

RESULTS

The qualitative research revealed a preponderance of "affective" associations over "cognitive" associations with regard to both IoR and GM technologies. The quantitative research indicated that where consumers were given time to reflect, evaluations of GM improved, while those of IoR did not (p < 0.01). There was a gender divide, with females being more positively inclined towards GM and males towards IoR (p < 0.01). Both technologies were significantly disfavoured compared to non-treated products (p < 0.01). There was a significant discrimination when the two technologies were presented as concepts and as products. GM was more favourably received as a concept than as a product (p < 0.01), while IoR was disfavoured in either form. The two food neophobia scales that were tested showed a divergence in performance, with the more affectively based scale showing a higher level of correlation with behaviour.

CONCLUSIONS

This research reveals that a largely affective (visceral) distrust of both IoR and GM exists within this young food consumer sample. As it is affective in nature, this position will be very resistant to education efforts, particularly if they are "cognitively" based. However, a significant softening of these affective attitudes towards GM products indicates that such efforts may be effective, given time and investment.

Meat and morality: The moral foundation of purity, but not harm, predicts attitudes toward cultured meat

Cultured meat (also referred to as cultivated, cell-based, or cell-cultured meat) is a novel food technology that is presented as a method of meat production without reliance on large-scale industrial farming. The pro-cultured meat narrative rests, in part, on a moral foundation: cultured meat is purported to alleviate the environmental and animal welfare harms associated with farmed meat. Despite this narrative, no research has examined which moral values underpin attitudes towards cultured meat. To examine this, we surveyed 1861 participants from the United States and Germany about their moral foundations and their attitudes towards cultured meat. In line with predictions, people who more strongly endorse moral values about purity (i.e., had higher scores on the purity subscale of the moral foundations scale) held more negative attitudes towards cultured meat. However, this relationship was much more consistent among participants from the United States than participants from Germany. Against predictions, attitudes towards cultured meat were not reliably associated with the extent to which people focus on harm as a moral foundation. The latter finding was particularly surprising in light of harm-reduction narratives around cultured meat. These findings demonstrate the need for a more nuanced discussion about, and understanding of, consumer concerns around cultured meat and the values that underpin them.

Development and validation of Japanese version of alternative food neophobia scale (J-FNS-A): association with willingness to eat alternative protein foods

Introduction

Food neophobia (FN) is a psychological trait that inhibits one's willingness to eat unfamiliar foods. It is related to the acceptance of insect foods and cultured meat, which are major protein alternatives to conventional meat, and is an important personality trait for understanding the near-future food industry. However, the factor structure of Pliner and Hobden's FN scale (FNS) is unstable due to respondents' cultural backgrounds. Thus, we aimed to develop a Japanese version based on the alternative FNS (FNS-A), the most recent revised version, and to examine its validity.

Methods

Four online surveys (preliminary 1: n = 202; preliminary 2: n = 207; main: n = 1,079; follow-up: n = 500) were conducted on the FNS-A. For the main survey, Japanese respondents (aged 20-69 years) answered the Japanese version of the FNS-A (J-FNS-A), their willingness to eat (WTE), and their familiarity with hamburgers containing regular protein foods (ground beef, tofu) and alternative protein foods (soy meat, cultured meat, cricket powder, algae powder, and mealworm powder).

Results

Consistent with the FNS-A, confirmatory factor analysis assuming a two-dimensional structure (approach and avoidance) showed satisfactory model fit indices. The mean J-FNS-A score (Cronbach's α for 8 items = 0.83) was 4.15 [standard deviation (SD) = 0.93]. J-FNS-A scores were not associated with age and gender, whereas a greater than moderate association was found with WTE hamburgers containing alternative protein foods (rs = -0.42 to -0.33). The strength of these negative associations increased as food familiarity decreased (r = 0.94). The test-retest reliability at 1 month was also satisfactory (r = 0.79).

Discussion

The validity of the J-FNS-A was confirmed. Higher J-FNS-A scores (mean = 41.51, SD = 9.25, converted to Pliner and Hobden's FNS score) of the respondents suggest that Japanese people prefer conservative foods. This scale could predict the negative attitudes toward foods with low familiarity, such as alternative proteins. The J-FNS-A appears to be a useful psychological tool for assessing Japanese food neophobia tendencies and predicting novel food choices of Japanese individuals.

Consumer's perception of food pairing products with usual, novel and unusual flavour combinations: A segmentation approach

In saturated markets, companies are continually launching new products. Food innovations particularly play a decisive role in this case. One new concept is food pairing, which signifies that the more aromatic compounds two foods have in common, the better they taste together. Food pairing offers an opportunity to develop innovative foods. However, some consumers are risk-averse or exhibit food neophobia. Studies on food neophobia indicate that innovative foods could face rejection. The factor that represents a marketing barrier is not only the sensory rejection of the products when tasting them but also the refusal to even try such innovative products. Therefore, the idea of whether consumers are generally open to food pairing is important to examine. Nonetheless, research into this issue is lacking thus far. The subject of how consumers judge usual, novel, and unusual pairing principles was investigated in this study. The topic of whether a target group for food pairing products exists and characterized the target group was also analysed. To achieve the objective of the study, an online survey of German consumers (n = 1,064) was conducted; these consumers judged the five flavour combinations of each category (usual, novel, unusual). The results revealed a four-cluster solution, with one-third of the sample expressing an openness to food pairing. The whole sample judged the usual combinations as suitable; by contrast, the novel and unusual combinations were deemed to be mainly appropriate for the food pairing cluster. The proposed measurement methodology for testing the openness of food pairing, which distinguishes between usual, novel, and unusual pairings, has demonstrated its usefulness. Those consumers who are open to food pairing have a high level of food involvement and a low degree of food neophobia. Furthermore, they show the highest organic food purchase frequency.

Consumers' perception of novel foods and the impact of heuristics and biases: A systematic review

According to the definition adopted in the European Union, novel foods are foods that were not consumed to a significant degree within the Union before May 15, 1997. This includes cultivated meat and insects. Novel foods are meant to play a critical role in the transition towards sustainable food systems. However, their success depends on whether and to what extent they will be incorporated into the diets at the population level. This review investigates consumers' perception of novel food products by narratively synthesising results on the influence of heuristics and biases triggered by emotions, personality traits, and socio-cultural factors. Empirical studies conducted in Western countries and published in English after 1997 were eligible, which led to 182 studies being included. Notably, most included studies focused on insects and cultivated meat. Disgust and fear are shown to be the main emotions driving rejection of novel foods, together with food neophobia and specific cultural norms common across countries included in the scope of the review. Familiarity with novel foods and curiosity both led to higher acceptance. Despite being investigated directly in a minority of studies, heuristics and related biases mostly fell under the "affect," the "natural-is-better," and the "trust" heuristics. The review also discusses to what extent consumers' perception reflects in the regulatory framework applicable to novel foods in the European Union, how it influences the regulation of insects and cultivated meat and which lessons can be drawn for the future of the regulatory framework.

A taste of cell-cultured meat: a scoping review

Cell-cultured meat (CM) is a novel meat product grown in vitro from animal cells, widely framed as equivalent to conventional meat but presented as produced in a more sustainable way. Despite its limited availability for human consumption, consumer acceptance of CM (e.g., willingness to purchase and consume) has been extensively investigated. A key but under-investigated assumption of these studies is that CM's sensory qualities are comparable to conventional, equivalent meat products. Therefore, the current review aims to clarify what is actually known about the sensory characteristics of CM and their potential impact on consumer acceptance. To this end, a structured scoping review of existing, peer-reviewed literature on the sensory evaluation of CM was conducted according to the PRISMA-ScR and Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. Among the included studies (N = 26), only 5 conducted research activities that could be termed "sensory evaluation," with only 4 of those 5 studies evaluating actual CM products in some form. The remaining 21 studies based their conclusions on the sensory characteristics of CM and consequent consumer acceptance to a set of hypothetical CM products and consumption experiences, often with explicitly positive information framing. In addition, many consumer acceptance studies in the literature have the explicit goal to increase the acceptance of CM, with some authors (researchers) acting as direct CM industry affiliates; this may be a source of bias on the level of consumer acceptance toward these products. By separating what is known about CM sensory characteristics and consumer acceptance from what is merely speculated, the current review reported realistic expectations of CM's sensory characteristics within the promissory narratives of CM proponents.

Evaluation of public submissions to the USDA for labeling of cell-cultured meat in the United States

With the rapid advancement of cell-cultured meat processing technologies and regulations, commercialization of cell-cultured meat to market shelves requires the implementation of labeling that informs and protects consumers while ensuring economic competitiveness. In November 2022, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) completed its first pre-market consultation of cell-cultured meat and did not question the safety of these products for human consumption. As of June 2023, commercialization of cell-cultured meat products has become a reality in the United States. To derive potential label terms and gain insight into how different stakeholders refer to these novel products, we analyzed 1,151 comments submitted to the 2021 U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Services (USDA-FSIS) call on the labeling of cell-cultured meat and poultry. Our first aim was to systematically assess the nature of comments with regards to their length, cited references, and supplemental materials. In addition, we aimed to identify the most used terms to refer to these products through text analysis. We also asked how these analyses would vary by affiliation category and economic interest. Using the listed organizations for each comment, we first determined financial ties: 77 (7%) comments came from those with an economic interest, 12 (1%) of the comments did not have an identifiable economic interest, while for the remaining 1,062 (92%) comments economic interest could not be determined. We then grouped comments into affiliation categories. Cell-cultured meat companies and animal welfare non-profits had the highest median word count, whereas comments from the unknown affiliation category had the lowest. We found across all comments the predominantly mentioned potential label terms, in descending order, to be cultured meat, lab-grown meat, cultivated meat, cell-cultured meat, clean meat, and cell-based meat. While all label terms were discussed throughout overall submissions, percentages of comments mentioning each term differed between affiliation categories. Our findings suggest differences in how affiliation categories are discussing cell-cultured meat products for the US market. As a next step, the perception and acceptance of these terms must be evaluated to identify the optimal label term regarding the information and protection provided to consumers while ensuring economic competitiveness.

The Scoop on SCOBY (Symbiotic Culture of Bacteria and Yeast): Exploring Consumer Behaviours towards a Novel Ice Cream

With the growing demand for sustainable practises, the food industry is increasingly adopting circular economy approaches. One example is recycling the symbiotic culture of bacteria and yeast (SCOBY) used in kombucha fermentation to create value-added products. However, consumer acceptance of such novel products remains unclear. To address this, the present study examined consumer attitudes towards ice cream made with SCOBY as an ingredient and how this affected their intention to consume it. Drawing on the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) and additional constructs such as emotions and food neophobia, an online survey was conducted with New Zealand consumers (N = 170). Results showed that the TPB constructs significantly predicted the intention to consume SCOBY ice cream. Moreover, by adding emotions to the constructs, the model's explanatory power was enhanced. Attitudes, subjective norms, and emotions were the main predictors of intention, which in turn was found to be the main predictor of behaviour. Participants' beliefs about the safety and taste of SCOBY ice cream were significantly correlated with their intention and behaviour, as were the opinions of nutritionists/dietitians, friends, and family. The model accounted for 21.7% of the variance in behaviour and 57.4% of the variance in intention. These findings can be used to plan marketing strategies related to waste-to-value-added products such as SCOBY ice cream.