“Grilling the myths”: Uncomfortable truths and promising paths in consumer research on plant-based alternatives

IF 4.9 1区 农林科学 Q1 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Davide Giacalone
{"title":"“Grilling the myths”: Uncomfortable truths and promising paths in consumer research on plant-based alternatives","authors":"Davide Giacalone","doi":"10.1016/j.foodqual.2025.105500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The urgent need for a dietary transition away from animal-based foods toward sustainable protein sources is a major focus in sensory and consumer science. Despite growing market availability and increased public interest in alternative proteins, significant barriers remain to achieving meaningful dietary shifts.</div><div>Building on an invited keynote presented at the 2024 Eurosense conference, this paper critically examines the state of sensory and consumer research on plant-based alternatives. The paper first and foremost highlights the significant gap between consumer expectations and the actual sensory performance of plant-based products, which continues to be the main factor hindering their widespread acceptance. It also addresses key methodological shortcomings in the literature, including the lack of robust sensory methodologies, unrealistic assumptions about substitution potential, an overreliance on intentions rather than actual behavior, and clear sampling biases.</div><div>Taken together, these factors obscure the substantial challenges facing plant-based alternatives. The interim conclusion is that current evidence does not convincingly demonstrate that these products can substantially replace animal products in our diets. However, it is essential to set realistic expectations. While plant-based alternatives are unlikely to completely displace animal products in the near future, they remain an important part of the solution. The final section highlights promising research avenues, emphasizing the critical role of sensory and consumer scientists in addressing these barriers and driving meaningful progress toward a protein transition.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":322,"journal":{"name":"Food Quality and Preference","volume":"129 ","pages":"Article 105500"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Quality and Preference","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0950329325000758","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The urgent need for a dietary transition away from animal-based foods toward sustainable protein sources is a major focus in sensory and consumer science. Despite growing market availability and increased public interest in alternative proteins, significant barriers remain to achieving meaningful dietary shifts.
Building on an invited keynote presented at the 2024 Eurosense conference, this paper critically examines the state of sensory and consumer research on plant-based alternatives. The paper first and foremost highlights the significant gap between consumer expectations and the actual sensory performance of plant-based products, which continues to be the main factor hindering their widespread acceptance. It also addresses key methodological shortcomings in the literature, including the lack of robust sensory methodologies, unrealistic assumptions about substitution potential, an overreliance on intentions rather than actual behavior, and clear sampling biases.
Taken together, these factors obscure the substantial challenges facing plant-based alternatives. The interim conclusion is that current evidence does not convincingly demonstrate that these products can substantially replace animal products in our diets. However, it is essential to set realistic expectations. While plant-based alternatives are unlikely to completely displace animal products in the near future, they remain an important part of the solution. The final section highlights promising research avenues, emphasizing the critical role of sensory and consumer scientists in addressing these barriers and driving meaningful progress toward a protein transition.
“拷问神话”:消费者对植物替代品的研究中令人不安的事实和有希望的途径
从动物性食物向可持续蛋白质来源的饮食转变的迫切需要是感官和消费者科学的一个主要焦点。尽管市场上可获得的替代蛋白质越来越多,公众对替代蛋白质的兴趣也越来越大,但实现有意义的饮食转变仍然存在重大障碍。在2024年欧洲感官会议上发表的受邀主题演讲的基础上,本文批判性地审视了植物性替代品的感官和消费者研究现状。这篇论文首先强调了消费者对植物性产品的期望与实际感官性能之间的巨大差距,这仍然是阻碍它们被广泛接受的主要因素。它还解决了文献中关键的方法缺陷,包括缺乏强大的感官方法,对替代潜力的不切实际的假设,过度依赖意图而不是实际行为,以及明显的抽样偏差。综上所述,这些因素掩盖了植物替代品面临的重大挑战。临时结论是,目前的证据并不能令人信服地证明这些产品可以在我们的饮食中大量取代动物产品。然而,设定现实的期望是至关重要的。虽然植物替代品不太可能在不久的将来完全取代动物产品,但它们仍然是解决方案的重要组成部分。最后一部分重点介绍了有前景的研究途径,强调了感官和消费者科学家在解决这些障碍和推动有意义的蛋白质转变方面的关键作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Food Quality and Preference
Food Quality and Preference 工程技术-食品科技
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
15.10%
发文量
263
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Food Quality and Preference is a journal devoted to sensory, consumer and behavioural research in food and non-food products. It publishes original research, critical reviews, and short communications in sensory and consumer science, and sensometrics. In addition, the journal publishes special invited issues on important timely topics and from relevant conferences. These are aimed at bridging the gap between research and application, bringing together authors and readers in consumer and market research, sensory science, sensometrics and sensory evaluation, nutrition and food choice, as well as food research, product development and sensory quality assurance. Submissions to Food Quality and Preference are limited to papers that include some form of human measurement; papers that are limited to physical/chemical measures or the routine application of sensory, consumer or econometric analysis will not be considered unless they specifically make a novel scientific contribution in line with the journal''s coverage as outlined below.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信