Consumer perceptions of conventional and alternative protein sources: A mixed-methods approach with meal and product framing

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Possidónio Da Silva, Catarina
Data de Publicação: 2020
Outros Autores: Prada, Marília, Graça, João, Piazza, Jared Raymond
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10451/44418
Resumo: Understanding consumer perceptions of meat alternatives is key to facilitating a shift toward more sustainable food consumption. Importantly, these perceptions may vary according to the characteristics of the consumer (e.g., preferences, motivations), the product (e.g., sensory attributes) and the encounter (e.g., how the meat alternative is presented/framed). Qualitative and quantitative methods were applied to examine consumer perceptions of five proposed alternatives to meat: legumes, tofu, seitan, lab-grown meat, and insects. In Study 1, 138 participants provided free associations with regards to conventional animal proteins (e.g., red/white meat, fish) and the five alternatives. Three profiles of consumers were identified: (1) hedonically motivated meat eaters uninterested in meat substitutes; (2) health-oriented meat eaters open to some meat substitutes; and (3) ethically conscious meat avoiders positively oriented to most meat alternatives. In Study 2, the presentation of the product was experimentally manipulated: 285 participants evaluated the same five meat alternatives along several dimensions (e.g., edibility, healthiness), either when framed as an individual product or as part of a larger meal. Overall, most meat alternatives benefited from a meal framing, with the notable exception of legumes, which benefited from an individual framing, and insects which were evaluated quite negatively regardless of framing. The present findings suggest that there is not a single way to frame all meat alternatives that will improve their appeal to all consumers.
id RCAP_52b51f46774f5718f7085e6e29dba197
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.ul.pt:10451/44418
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Consumer perceptions of conventional and alternative protein sources: A mixed-methods approach with meal and product framingMeat alternativesMeat substitutesPlant-based foodMeal framingLab-grown meatUnderstanding consumer perceptions of meat alternatives is key to facilitating a shift toward more sustainable food consumption. Importantly, these perceptions may vary according to the characteristics of the consumer (e.g., preferences, motivations), the product (e.g., sensory attributes) and the encounter (e.g., how the meat alternative is presented/framed). Qualitative and quantitative methods were applied to examine consumer perceptions of five proposed alternatives to meat: legumes, tofu, seitan, lab-grown meat, and insects. In Study 1, 138 participants provided free associations with regards to conventional animal proteins (e.g., red/white meat, fish) and the five alternatives. Three profiles of consumers were identified: (1) hedonically motivated meat eaters uninterested in meat substitutes; (2) health-oriented meat eaters open to some meat substitutes; and (3) ethically conscious meat avoiders positively oriented to most meat alternatives. In Study 2, the presentation of the product was experimentally manipulated: 285 participants evaluated the same five meat alternatives along several dimensions (e.g., edibility, healthiness), either when framed as an individual product or as part of a larger meal. Overall, most meat alternatives benefited from a meal framing, with the notable exception of legumes, which benefited from an individual framing, and insects which were evaluated quite negatively regardless of framing. The present findings suggest that there is not a single way to frame all meat alternatives that will improve their appeal to all consumers.Repositório da Universidade de LisboaPossidónio Da Silva, CatarinaPrada, MaríliaGraça, JoãoPiazza, Jared Raymond2020-09-23T13:03:22Z20212021-01-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10451/44418engPossidónio, C., Prada, M., Graça, J., Piazza, J. (2021). Consumer perceptions of conventional and alternative protein sources: A mixed-methods approach with meal and product framing. Appetite, 156 (1), 10486010.1016/j.appet.2020.104860info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-11-08T16:45:27Zoai:repositorio.ul.pt:10451/44418Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T21:57:00.034517Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Consumer perceptions of conventional and alternative protein sources: A mixed-methods approach with meal and product framing
title Consumer perceptions of conventional and alternative protein sources: A mixed-methods approach with meal and product framing
spellingShingle Consumer perceptions of conventional and alternative protein sources: A mixed-methods approach with meal and product framing
Possidónio Da Silva, Catarina
Meat alternatives
Meat substitutes
Plant-based food
Meal framing
Lab-grown meat
title_short Consumer perceptions of conventional and alternative protein sources: A mixed-methods approach with meal and product framing
title_full Consumer perceptions of conventional and alternative protein sources: A mixed-methods approach with meal and product framing
title_fullStr Consumer perceptions of conventional and alternative protein sources: A mixed-methods approach with meal and product framing
title_full_unstemmed Consumer perceptions of conventional and alternative protein sources: A mixed-methods approach with meal and product framing
title_sort Consumer perceptions of conventional and alternative protein sources: A mixed-methods approach with meal and product framing
author Possidónio Da Silva, Catarina
author_facet Possidónio Da Silva, Catarina
Prada, Marília
Graça, João
Piazza, Jared Raymond
author_role author
author2 Prada, Marília
Graça, João
Piazza, Jared Raymond
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Repositório da Universidade de Lisboa
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Possidónio Da Silva, Catarina
Prada, Marília
Graça, João
Piazza, Jared Raymond
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Meat alternatives
Meat substitutes
Plant-based food
Meal framing
Lab-grown meat
topic Meat alternatives
Meat substitutes
Plant-based food
Meal framing
Lab-grown meat
description Understanding consumer perceptions of meat alternatives is key to facilitating a shift toward more sustainable food consumption. Importantly, these perceptions may vary according to the characteristics of the consumer (e.g., preferences, motivations), the product (e.g., sensory attributes) and the encounter (e.g., how the meat alternative is presented/framed). Qualitative and quantitative methods were applied to examine consumer perceptions of five proposed alternatives to meat: legumes, tofu, seitan, lab-grown meat, and insects. In Study 1, 138 participants provided free associations with regards to conventional animal proteins (e.g., red/white meat, fish) and the five alternatives. Three profiles of consumers were identified: (1) hedonically motivated meat eaters uninterested in meat substitutes; (2) health-oriented meat eaters open to some meat substitutes; and (3) ethically conscious meat avoiders positively oriented to most meat alternatives. In Study 2, the presentation of the product was experimentally manipulated: 285 participants evaluated the same five meat alternatives along several dimensions (e.g., edibility, healthiness), either when framed as an individual product or as part of a larger meal. Overall, most meat alternatives benefited from a meal framing, with the notable exception of legumes, which benefited from an individual framing, and insects which were evaluated quite negatively regardless of framing. The present findings suggest that there is not a single way to frame all meat alternatives that will improve their appeal to all consumers.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020-09-23T13:03:22Z
2021
2021-01-01T00:00:00Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10451/44418
url http://hdl.handle.net/10451/44418
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Possidónio, C., Prada, M., Graça, J., Piazza, J. (2021). Consumer perceptions of conventional and alternative protein sources: A mixed-methods approach with meal and product framing. Appetite, 156 (1), 104860
10.1016/j.appet.2020.104860
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799134512638066688