Journal Articles

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/7915

Browse

Filters

2024 - 20252

Settings

Author: search.filters.author.Foster MSubject: search.filters.subject.Plant-based meat alternatives

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Exploring the association of personal factors with affective responses to plant-based meat alternatives with consideration of their perceived similarity to meat
    (Elsevier Ltd, 2025-12-01) Giezenaar C; Mehta A; Orr RE; Godfrey AJR; Foster M; Hort J
    Plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs) have gained popularity as perceived sustainable replacements for meat, yet consumption remains limited. Understanding how personality traits shape PBMA consumption experience is therefore essential. This study surveyed 140 New Zealand consumers, assessing behavioural traits and attitudes related to willingness to reduce meat consumption/increase PBMA consumption. Participants completed tasting sessions evaluating commercially available PBMA products, based on flavour, texture, overall liking and emotions evoked, and sample perceived similarity to meat. Participants reported their demographic information, dietary habits, and frequency of meat and PBMA consumption. Results showed that higher social status derived from PBMA consumption were linked with higher liking ratings and citation proportion of ‘hungry’ for PBMAs. However, high negative attitude towards vegetarianism/veganism was linked to higher citation proportion for ‘unhappy’ for wholefood samples, while lower citation proportion for ‘unhappy’ for somewhat meat-like samples. High meat attachment was associated with lower perceived similarity to meat in both meat-like and somewhat meat-like samples. Additionally, the high meat consumption group reported lower texture and overall liking for meat-like samples. High variety seeking consumers (VARSEEK scores) were positively associated with flavour and overall liking for wholefood samples. Based on dietary groups, meat avoiders, generally driven by environmental and animal welfare concerns, reported more negative emotions such as ‘unhappy’ when tasting wholefood PBMAs compared to omnivores and flexitarians, despite their strong ethical and environmental motivations. The research highlights the impact of consumer behavioural traits and attitudes on their PBMA perception and acceptance, providing valuable insights for improving product development.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Effects of intrinsic and extrinsic product characteristics related to protein source, health and environmental sustainability, on product choice and sensory evaluation of meatballs and plant-based alternatives
    (Elsevier Ltd, 2024-04) Giezenaar C; Godfrey AJR; Foster M; Hort J
    Health is cited as a major driver for substituting meat with plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs). In contrast, many consumers are reportedly unaware of the difference in environmental impact between meat and PBMAs. This study determined relative effects of internal (protein source) and external (health/origin/sustainability) product attributes on product choice and (expected) liking of meat and PBMAs. Participants (n = 144) ranked ten sets of three product concepts from best to worst in a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Random combinations of four product attributes were presented on hypothetical product packages: i) protein source (beef/chickpea/soy protein); ii) health-star rating (1.5/4.5 stars); iii) ingredient origin (local/imported); iv) sustainability rating (green tick absent/present), and product worth, related to each of the 24 possible attribute combinations, was determined. Secondly, commercially-available beef, soy, and chickpea products were sensorially evaluated for expected/actual liking, both blindly and alongside combinations of internal/external product attributes used in the DCE. The DCE indicated all product attributes affected product worth. However, two consumer segments were established: i) a ‘Protein Cluster’ (47%) comprising consumers who chose ‘beef’ products regardless of the remaining attributes present, and ii) a ‘Health/Sustainability Cluster’ (53%) of consumers whose choices were driven by positive health/sustainability claims. Protein source drove both expected and actual liking of the samples (p < 0.001). Health/origin/sustainability also contributed to expected liking (p < 0.05), but only health consistently affected actual liking ratings (p < 0.05). In conclusion, half of consumers chose products based on health/origin/sustainability claims, whereas the other half selected products based on protein source. Origin/sustainability claims affected product choice, but minimally affected product experience of plant-based samples.