Consumer Perception of Plant-Based Cheese

IF 3.4 2区 农林科学 Q2 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Ella Warner, Kumpol Homwongpanich, MaryAnne Drake
{"title":"Consumer Perception of Plant-Based Cheese","authors":"Ella Warner,&nbsp;Kumpol Homwongpanich,&nbsp;MaryAnne Drake","doi":"10.1111/1750-3841.70460","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <p>Plant-based dairy alternatives have been an increasing trend among consumers, with plant-based milk being the most profitable and rapidly growing dairy alternative. Plant-based cheese (PBC), however, has recently remained static. The objectives of this study were to determine purchase motivations, consumer acceptance, and areas for improvement for Cheddar and mozzarella-style PBC. An online survey was conducted with consumers of dairy cheese (DC) and PBC (<i>n</i> = 311). Subsequently, consumer acceptance testing was conducted with both plant-based Cheddar-style cheese (<i>n</i> = 105) and plant-based mozzarella-style cheese (<i>n</i> = 117). Two days of testing were dedicated to each PBC style, consumers evaluated the shreds cold (as-is) on the first day and melted on the second day. The online survey consisted of a maximum difference (MXD) scaling, agreement questions, and an ingredient list activity. Consumer acceptance testing utilized liking and check-all-that-apply (CATA) questions. Conceptually, flavor, texture, ingredients, and protein content were the most important attributes for PBC purchase. A short ingredient list was preferred. Dairy cheese (DC) was perceived as superior in flavor and texture, while PBC was perceived as more sustainable, more ethical, and healthier. Both products were perceived as equally nutritious. Cheesy, creamy, buttery, and soft were desirable attributes when served cold and melted for both PB styles. Undesirable attributes for both styles when evaluated cold included gritty, rubbery, artificial, and off flavor. During the melted evaluation (both styles), artificial and off flavors were undesirable. Two major pain points remain for the PBC market: flavor and texture.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Practical Applications</h3>\n \n <p>Flavor and texture, both cold and hot, remain challenges for Cheddar and mozzarella-style plant-based cheeses. Understanding consumer perceptions of plant-based cheeses can aid in the development of products that meet consumer expectations and desires.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":193,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Food Science","volume":"90 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12484713/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Food Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://ift.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1750-3841.70460","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Plant-based dairy alternatives have been an increasing trend among consumers, with plant-based milk being the most profitable and rapidly growing dairy alternative. Plant-based cheese (PBC), however, has recently remained static. The objectives of this study were to determine purchase motivations, consumer acceptance, and areas for improvement for Cheddar and mozzarella-style PBC. An online survey was conducted with consumers of dairy cheese (DC) and PBC (n = 311). Subsequently, consumer acceptance testing was conducted with both plant-based Cheddar-style cheese (n = 105) and plant-based mozzarella-style cheese (n = 117). Two days of testing were dedicated to each PBC style, consumers evaluated the shreds cold (as-is) on the first day and melted on the second day. The online survey consisted of a maximum difference (MXD) scaling, agreement questions, and an ingredient list activity. Consumer acceptance testing utilized liking and check-all-that-apply (CATA) questions. Conceptually, flavor, texture, ingredients, and protein content were the most important attributes for PBC purchase. A short ingredient list was preferred. Dairy cheese (DC) was perceived as superior in flavor and texture, while PBC was perceived as more sustainable, more ethical, and healthier. Both products were perceived as equally nutritious. Cheesy, creamy, buttery, and soft were desirable attributes when served cold and melted for both PB styles. Undesirable attributes for both styles when evaluated cold included gritty, rubbery, artificial, and off flavor. During the melted evaluation (both styles), artificial and off flavors were undesirable. Two major pain points remain for the PBC market: flavor and texture.

Practical Applications

Flavor and texture, both cold and hot, remain challenges for Cheddar and mozzarella-style plant-based cheeses. Understanding consumer perceptions of plant-based cheeses can aid in the development of products that meet consumer expectations and desires.

Abstract Image

消费者对植物奶酪的看法。
植物性乳制品替代品在消费者中呈增长趋势,植物性牛奶是最有利可图、增长最快的乳制品替代品。然而,植物奶酪(PBC)最近一直保持不变。本研究的目的是确定购买动机,消费者接受度,以及切达奶酪和马苏里拉奶酪式PBC的改进领域。对乳制品奶酪(DC)和PBC的消费者进行了一项在线调查(n = 311)。随后,对植物性切达奶酪(n = 105)和植物性马苏里拉奶酪(n = 117)进行了消费者接受度测试。两天的测试专门针对每种PBC风格,消费者在第一天评估冷(原样)的碎片,第二天评估融化的碎片。在线调查包括最大差异(MXD)量表、一致性问题和成分列表活动。消费者验收测试使用了喜欢和检查所有应用(CATA)问题。从概念上讲,风味、质地、成分和蛋白质含量是购买PBC最重要的属性。一个简短的配料表是最好的。乳制品奶酪(DC)被认为在风味和质地上都更优越,而PBC则被认为更可持续、更道德、更健康。人们认为这两种产品的营养价值相同。奶酪,奶油,黄油和软是可取的属性,当服务冷和融化的PB风格。当评估冷时,两种风格的不良属性包括砂砾,橡胶,人造和异味。在融化的评估(两种风格),人工和off口味是不可取的。PBC市场仍有两个主要的痛点:味道和质地。实际应用:无论是冷奶酪还是热奶酪,口味和质地都是切达奶酪和马苏里拉式植物奶酪面临的挑战。了解消费者对植物奶酪的看法有助于开发符合消费者期望和愿望的产品。
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
Journal of Food Science
Journal of Food Science 工程技术-食品科技
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
2.60%
发文量
412
审稿时长
3.1 months
期刊介绍: The goal of the Journal of Food Science is to offer scientists, researchers, and other food professionals the opportunity to share knowledge of scientific advancements in the myriad disciplines affecting their work, through a respected peer-reviewed publication. The Journal of Food Science serves as an international forum for vital research and developments in food science. The range of topics covered in the journal include: -Concise Reviews and Hypotheses in Food Science -New Horizons in Food Research -Integrated Food Science -Food Chemistry -Food Engineering, Materials Science, and Nanotechnology -Food Microbiology and Safety -Sensory and Consumer Sciences -Health, Nutrition, and Food -Toxicology and Chemical Food Safety The Journal of Food Science publishes peer-reviewed articles that cover all aspects of food science, including safety and nutrition. Reviews should be 15 to 50 typewritten pages (including tables, figures, and references), should provide in-depth coverage of a narrowly defined topic, and should embody careful evaluation (weaknesses, strengths, explanation of discrepancies in results among similar studies) of all pertinent studies, so that insightful interpretations and conclusions can be presented. Hypothesis papers are especially appropriate in pioneering areas of research or important areas that are afflicted by scientific controversy.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信