Hanna Zaleskiewicz, Maria Siwa, Anna Banik, Zofia Szczuka, Ewa Kulis, Francesca Grossi, Polymeros Chrysochou, Bjørn Tore Nystrand, Toula Perrea, Antonella Samoggia, Arlind Xhelili, Athanasios Krystallis, Aleksandra Luszczynska
{"title":"Psychosocial determinants of alternative protein choices: a meta-review.","authors":"Hanna Zaleskiewicz, Maria Siwa, Anna Banik, Zofia Szczuka, Ewa Kulis, Francesca Grossi, Polymeros Chrysochou, Bjørn Tore Nystrand, Toula Perrea, Antonella Samoggia, Arlind Xhelili, Athanasios Krystallis, Aleksandra Luszczynska","doi":"10.1080/17437199.2024.2412630","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This meta-review synthesises evidence concerning individual-level psychosocial characteristics associated with alternative protein food (APF) choices. We investigated the associations between: (i) individual-level determinants based on the COM-B model (capabilities, perceived opportunities, motivation), sociodemographic factors, and (ii) indicators of APF choices (e.g., intention to eat, buy, pay, acceptance, intake). Differences in characteristics of APF made from plants, insects, mushrooms, and other APF sources were explored. Thirteen databases were searched in this pre-registered (CRD42023388694) meta-review and 28 reviews were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the ROBIS tool. For <i>plant-based APF</i> choices, consistent support was obtained for associations with (i) capabilities, including cooking skills, exposure to/familiarity with APF; (ii) motivations, including perceived health-related, pro-environmental, and sustainability benefits, and animal welfare; (iii) younger age and higher education. For <i>insect-based APF</i> choices, consistent support was obtained for (i) capabilities, including formal knowledge about APF, exposure to/familiarity with APF; (ii) perceived opportunities, encompassing positive social and cultural norms, distrust in technology; (iii) motivations, including perceived health benefits, pro-environmental and sustainability benefits, perceived health risks, being adventurous/daring, curiosity, neophilia, disgust; (iv) male gender and younger age. Recognising differences in potential determinants across various APF sources is essential for designing interventions aimed at promoting APF uptake.</p>","PeriodicalId":48034,"journal":{"name":"Health Psychology Review","volume":" ","pages":"1-26"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2024.2412630","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This meta-review synthesises evidence concerning individual-level psychosocial characteristics associated with alternative protein food (APF) choices. We investigated the associations between: (i) individual-level determinants based on the COM-B model (capabilities, perceived opportunities, motivation), sociodemographic factors, and (ii) indicators of APF choices (e.g., intention to eat, buy, pay, acceptance, intake). Differences in characteristics of APF made from plants, insects, mushrooms, and other APF sources were explored. Thirteen databases were searched in this pre-registered (CRD42023388694) meta-review and 28 reviews were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the ROBIS tool. For plant-based APF choices, consistent support was obtained for associations with (i) capabilities, including cooking skills, exposure to/familiarity with APF; (ii) motivations, including perceived health-related, pro-environmental, and sustainability benefits, and animal welfare; (iii) younger age and higher education. For insect-based APF choices, consistent support was obtained for (i) capabilities, including formal knowledge about APF, exposure to/familiarity with APF; (ii) perceived opportunities, encompassing positive social and cultural norms, distrust in technology; (iii) motivations, including perceived health benefits, pro-environmental and sustainability benefits, perceived health risks, being adventurous/daring, curiosity, neophilia, disgust; (iv) male gender and younger age. Recognising differences in potential determinants across various APF sources is essential for designing interventions aimed at promoting APF uptake.
期刊介绍:
The publication of Health Psychology Review (HPR) marks a significant milestone in the field of health psychology, as it is the first review journal dedicated to this important and rapidly growing discipline. Edited by a highly respected team, HPR provides a critical platform for the review, development of theories, and conceptual advancements in health psychology. This prestigious international forum not only contributes to the progress of health psychology but also fosters its connection with the broader field of psychology and other related academic and professional domains. With its vital insights, HPR is a must-read for those involved in the study, teaching, and practice of health psychology, behavioral medicine, and related areas.