To Örebro University

For the sake of both the environment and human health, it is necessary to reduce meat consumption. However, increased consumer adoption of plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs) will only occur when such products are attractive. PBMAs with meat-like sensory attributes and those that can be cooked similarly to meat are known to be preferred, but the preference for meat-likeness varies depending on the consumer's attitude towards meat. This study determined the relationship between consumers' level of meat attachment (MA) on their sensory perceptions of and preference for commercial PBMAs, and their drivers of liking. MA was measured by the Meat Attachment Questionnaire (MAQ); consumers with either low or high MA (LMA and HMA, respectively) were invited to participate in the study (n = 99). The sensory characteristics of seven PBMAs were evaluated using a rate-all-that-apply (RATA) questionnaire, along with an ideal profile and product hedonics. Consumers with LMA had significantly higher overall, aroma, and taste liking, compared with consumers with HMA. Both LMA and HMA consumers similarly discriminated among the sensory properties of PBMAs and the ideal profile. Nevertheless, a further adapted penalty analysis showed subtle differences in consumers' penalisation of sensory attributes depending on MA level. These findings could be used for future research and the development of PBMAs based on consumers' MA; they could also be extended for application in a meal context where the PBMAs are consumed.

This field experiment explored whether and to what extent claims about expert recommendations (i.e., those of the chef) and recommendations from other restaurant guests influenced customers' food choices in a restaurant. The menu in the study consisted entirely of vegetarian dishes, two of which were selected to be emphasised either as “Chef's choice” or as “Guests' choice” on the menu, thereby providing expert-based and social-based cues suggesting one of the dishes at different study time points. The selected dishes were a vegetarian version of a conventional Swedish meat dish (a plant-based patty) and a nonconventional dish (lentils with “zero-waste” pesto). Over four weeks, the restaurant's sales data were collected, and customers were invited to participate in a voluntary survey. This survey gathered information regarding sociodemographic characteristics and more details about the dish selection, including subjective ratings of dish liking and overall meal satisfaction. A total of 1540 dishes were sold, and 524 customers participated in the survey. The plant-based patty was the most popular choice across all weeks, and the “Chef's choice” had no additive effect, suggesting its high stability in popularity. Labelling a less popular dish (lentils with “zero-waste” pesto) with “Chef's choice” had a positive impact on its selection, while labelling it with “Guests' choice” made no difference. These results suggest that in the absence of meat options, some customers appear to transfer the concept of a meat-centric dish to a similar vegetarian dish (in this case, a plant-based patty), whereas a less popular dish with no resemblance to a conventional meat dish can become more popular when recommended by a presumable expert on the matter. However, further research is necessary to ascertain the efficacy of this effect in diverse restaurant contexts, based on designs with better possibilities to establish causality.

Numerous public initiatives aim to influence individual food choices by informing about what is considered ‘healthy’, ‘climate-friendly’, and generally ‘sustainable’ food. However, research suggests that rather than public authorities, social influence is more likely to affect people’s behaviour. Using a randomised controlled trial, this study investigated if and how the two kinds of influences (factual versus social) could affect the real-life, self-reported intake of plant- and animal-based foods. In a four-month randomised controlled trial, a self-selected sample of adults living in Sweden (N = 237) tracked their daily food consumption several times per week using a tailored mobile phone app. Participants were randomised into one of three groups: two treatment groups receiving factual or social information about plant- and animal-based food consumption, or a control group receiving no information. Pre- and post-questionnaires provided additional background information about the participants. Participants’ food habits varied from week to week, and an explorative analysis pointed to a slight decrease in the consumption of animal-based food in the group that received social information. However, the longer-term patterns remained relatively constant in all groups, showing no substantial shift regardless of the kind of cues that the participants received. By investigating the roles of two common types of information about food and dietary change, the results contribute to discussions about how and by whom effective and efficient measures can be implemented to transform food habits. The results suggest there is limited potential for sustained and substantial behavioural changes through both social and factual information campaigns.