The Effect of New Concepts Used for Meat on Neophobia

Abstract

The objective of this research is to examine the responses of students enrolled in the Faculty of Health Sciences at Afyonkarahisar University of Health Sciences when asked with meat substitutes which suggested as an alternative to traditional meat products. The study involved 294 participants who were randomly selected from the student population. These participants have an average age of 21.3 ± 7.66 years. The majority of the participants are women, accounting for 86.1% of the sample. Among the students, the Nutrition and Dietetics Department is the most heavily represented, making up 61.6% of the participants. The research explores participants' perceptions of novel meat substitutes and their reactions to these alternatives. A significant portion of the participants expressed the belief that these new meat concepts are unnatural. Interestingly, when comparing the responses across different academic departments, there were no noticeable differences in attitudes toward these novel meat concepts, and this finding was statistically significant (p < 0.05). The study also delves into the participants' level of food neophobia, which refers to the fear or reluctance to try new foods. The average score on the food neophobia scale was found to be 35.46±5.646. This score serves as an indicator of the participants' overall attitude towards trying unfamiliar foods. Notably, there was no significant difference in the degree of food neophobia when considering the participants' academic fields.

Keywords

• Artificial Meat
• Meat
• New Food Phobia
• Purchasing.

References

1. AFSU. 2023. Afyonkarahisar University of Health Sciences, Registrar's Office. Accessed from on https://ogrenci.afsu.edu.tr/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2023/01/aralik-2022.pdf Bryant C. J. 2020. Culture, meat, and cultured meat. Journal of Animal Science, 98(8), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skaa172
2. Bryant C. J. & Barnett J. C. 2019) What’s in a name? Consumer perceptions of in vitro meat under different names. Appetite, 137(February), 104–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.02.021
3. Bryant C. & Sanctorum H. 2021. Alternative proteins, evolving attitudes: Comparing consumer attitudes to plant-based and cultured meat in Belgium in two consecutive years. Appetite, 161(August 2020), 105161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105161
4. Dağ T. & Tabak G. 2021. The Effect of Personality on Food Neophobia and Neophilia: A Research in Nevşehir Province. Review of Tourism Administration (ROTA) Journal, 2(1), 35–54.
5. de Oliveira Padilha L. G., Malek L. & Umberger W. J. 2022. Consumers’ attitudes towards lab-grown meat, conventionally raised meat and plant-based protein alternatives. Food Quality and Preference, 99(May), 104573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2022.104573
6. de Oliveira Torres T., Gomes D. R., & Mattos M. P. 2020. Factors associated with food neophobia in children: Systematic review. Revista Paulista de Pediatria, 39. https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-0462/2021/39/2020089
7. Duman E., Akçil Ok M. & Keser A. 2020. Adaptation of the Food Neophobia Scale into Turkish: Validity and Reliability Study. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(2), 157–161. https://doi.org/10.30934/kusbed.643038
8. Dupont J. & Fiebelkorn F. 2020. Attitudes and acceptance of young people toward the consumption of insects and cultured meat in Germany. Food Quality and Preference, 85(December), 103983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.103983

9. Ede G. & Yalçın H. 2023. Attitudes of Nutrition and Dietetics Students towards Artificial Meat Consumption. Akademik Gıda, 21(1), 80–89. https://doi.org/10.24323/akademik-gida.1274031
10. Gençel M. 2021. Relationship between food neophobia level and food selection factors [Master's Thesis, Kocaeli University Institute of Social Sciences] Access: Higher Education Council National Thesis Center (ID: 681962).
11. Gómez-Luciano C. A., de Aguiar L. K., Vriesekoop F. & Urbano, B. 2019. Consumers’ willingness to purchase three alternatives to meat proteins in the United Kingdom, Spain, Brazil and the Dominican Republic. Food Quality and Preference, 78(December 2018), 103732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.103732
12. González N., Marquès M., Nadal M. & Domingo J. L. 2020. Meat consumption: Which are the current global risks? A review of recent (2010–2020) evidences. Food Research International, 137, 109341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109341
13. Gravel A. & Doyen A. 2020. The use of edible insect proteins in food: Challenges and issues related to their functional properties. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies, 59(December), 102272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2019.102272
14. Hartmann C., Shi J., Giusto A. & Siegrist M. 2015. The psychology of eating insects: A cross-cultural comparison between Germany and China. Food Quality and Preference, 44, 148–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.04.013
15. Hocquette A., Lambert C., Sinquin C., Peterolff L., Wagner Z., Bonny S. P. F., … Hocquette J. F. 2015. Educated consumers don’t believe artificial meat is the solution to the problems with the meat industry. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 14(2), 273–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(14)60886-8
16. Kol K. C. & Akçil Ok M. 2020. Determination of Academicians' Food Neophobia and Affecting Factors. Başkent Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(2), 96–116.
17. Molfetta M., Morais E. G., Barreira L., Bruno G. L., Porcelli F., Dugat-Bony E., … Minervini F. 2022. Protein Sources Alternative to Meat: State of the Art and Involvement of Fermentation. Foods, 11(14), 1–30. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/foods11142065
18. Okumus B., Dedeoğlu B. B. & Shi F. 2021. Gender and generation as antecedents of food neophobia and food neophilia. Tourism Management Perspectives, 37, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100773
19. Pandurangan M. & Kim D. H. 2015. A Novel Approach For In Vitro Meat Production. Applied Microbiology And Biotechnology, 99(13), 5391-5395.
20. Pliner P. & Hobden K. 1992. Development of a scale to measure the trait of food neophobia in humans. Appetite, 19(2), 105–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/0195-6663(92)90014-W
21. Rabadán A. & Bernabéu R. 2021. A systematic review of studies using the Food Neophobia Scale: Conclusions from thirty years of studies. Food Quality and Preference, 93(1–18). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104241
22. Reddy M. K., Narayanan R., Rao V. A., Valli C., & Sujatha G. 2022. Cultured Meat - A review Cultured Meat – A review. Biological Forum – An International Journal, 14(4), 363–367.
23. Slade P. 2018. If you build it, will they eat it? Consumer preferences for plant-based and cultured meat burgers. Appetite, 125, 428–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2018.02.030
24. Smetana S., Ristic D., Pleissner D., Tuomisto H. L., Parniakov O. & Heinz V. 2023. Meat substitutes: Resource demands and environmental footprints. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 190(December), 106831. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106831
25. Soylu A. G., Taştan H., Eban F. & Aslantürk E. 2021. Evaluation of Consumers 'Approach to Street Taste in terms of Neophobia Attitudes. Safran Kültür ve Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(1), 151–167.
26. SYSTEMIC. 2023. Available online: https://systemic-hub.eu/coordination/.
27. TÜBER. 2019. Türkiye Beslenme Rehberi. T.C. Sağlık Bakanlığı Halk Sağlığı Genel Müdürlüğü.
28. Uçar M. E. 2018. New food fear and evaluation of diet quality in adults. [Master's Thesis, Hacettepe University Institute of Health Sciences] Access: Council of Higher Education National Thesis Center (ID: 514649).
29. Van Loo E. J., Caputo V. & Lusk J. L. 2020. Consumer preferences for farm-raised meat, lab-grown meat, and plant-based meat alternatives: Does information or brand matter? Food Policy, 95(August 2019), 101931. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2020.101931