Disgusting, sustainable, odd: A study on consumers' social representation of insect-based food and its association with TPB variables

IF 4.9 1区农林科学 Q1 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

Food Quality and Preference Pub Date : 2025-03-18 DOI:10.1016/j.foodqual.2025.105510

Anna Miglietta , Marco Rizzo , Barbara Loera

{"title":"Disgusting, sustainable, odd: A study on consumers' social representation of insect-based food and its association with TPB variables","authors":"Anna Miglietta , Marco Rizzo , Barbara Loera","doi":"10.1016/j.foodqual.2025.105510","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Despite their potential as sustainable protein sources, insect-based food products are facing slow acceptance by European consumers. The study investigated societal attitudes toward insect-based foods according to a survey of Italian consumers. Employing the Theory of Social Representation (SR) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) the study adopted a quali-quatitative approach to identify the interplay between cultural factors and determinants of behavioral intentions to consume insect-based foods.</div><div>The study sample (<em>N</em> = 380) responded to a two-part online survey: a free word association task to the stimulus “insect-based food” and a structured questionnaire of TPB variables (attitude toward insect-based food, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control, behavioral intention) and its pertinent extensions, i.e., disgust, food neophobia, and positive moral attitudes. The lexical corpus derived from free associations was analyzed with ALCESTE and the resulting lexical classes were illustrated by means of quantitative measures.</div><div>Three social representations of insect-based food, varying in their degree of abstraction/concreteness and perceived safety and effectiveness, were identified and labeled as “Simply Disgusting,” “Nutritious and Sustainable,” and “Curiosity and Caution.” Each representation was associated with a well-defined profile of participants and was clearly linked to participants' beliefs about insect-based food, the moral implications of these dietary choices, and consumers' intentions to purchase such products.</div><div>The study suggests the need for targeted interventions to address societal misconception and foster a more favorable perception of insect-based food products as viable food options in European diets. Our findings provide insights for policymakers and producers seeking to promote sustainable dietary choices.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":322,"journal":{"name":"Food Quality and Preference","volume":"129 ","pages":"Article 105510"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","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/S0950329325000850","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

Despite their potential as sustainable protein sources, insect-based food products are facing slow acceptance by European consumers. The study investigated societal attitudes toward insect-based foods according to a survey of Italian consumers. Employing the Theory of Social Representation (SR) and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) the study adopted a quali-quatitative approach to identify the interplay between cultural factors and determinants of behavioral intentions to consume insect-based foods.

The study sample (N = 380) responded to a two-part online survey: a free word association task to the stimulus “insect-based food” and a structured questionnaire of TPB variables (attitude toward insect-based food, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control, behavioral intention) and its pertinent extensions, i.e., disgust, food neophobia, and positive moral attitudes. The lexical corpus derived from free associations was analyzed with ALCESTE and the resulting lexical classes were illustrated by means of quantitative measures.

Three social representations of insect-based food, varying in their degree of abstraction/concreteness and perceived safety and effectiveness, were identified and labeled as “Simply Disgusting,” “Nutritious and Sustainable,” and “Curiosity and Caution.” Each representation was associated with a well-defined profile of participants and was clearly linked to participants' beliefs about insect-based food, the moral implications of these dietary choices, and consumers' intentions to purchase such products.

The study suggests the need for targeted interventions to address societal misconception and foster a more favorable perception of insect-based food products as viable food options in European diets. Our findings provide insights for policymakers and producers seeking to promote sustainable dietary choices.

查看原文本刊更多论文

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 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.