Is the desire to eat familiar and unfamiliar meat products influenced by the emotions expressed on eaters’ faces?
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to test if the social context represented by eaters' faces expressing emotions can modulate the desire to eat meat, especially for unfamiliar meat products. Forty-four young men and women were presented with two series of photographs. The first series (non-social context) was composed of eight meat pictures, four unfamiliar and four familiar. The second series (social context) consisted of the same pictures presented with eaters expressing three different emotions: disgust, pleasure or neutrality. For every picture, the participants were asked to estimate the intensity of their desire to eat the meat product viewed on the picture. Results showed that meat desire depended on interactions between product familiarity, social context and the participant's gender. In the non-social context, the men liked the familiar meat products more than the women, whereas their desire to eat unfamiliar meat products was similar. Compared to the non-social context, viewing another person eating with a neutral and a happy facial expression increased the desire to eat. Furthermore, the increase in the desire to eat meat associated with happy faces was greater for the unfamiliar than for the familiar meat products in men, and greater for the familiar than for the unfamiliar meats in women. In the presence of disgusted faces, the desire to eat meat remained constant for unfamiliar products in all participants whereas it only decreased for familiar products in men.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Learning and cognitive theories suggest that individuals learn and change their behaviours according to models they can identify with from reading materials.
“Further, learning and cognitive theories suggest that individuals learn and change their behaviours according to the models they can identify with from the reading materials (Rousset et al., 2008).”
From Reading for pleasure in childhood and adolescent healthy behaviours: Longitudinal associations using the Millennium Cohort Study (2020) · cites this paper as Rousset et al., 2008
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 53 · Cited by 26
- Authors
- Rousset, S., Schlich, P., Chatonnier, A., Barthomeuf, L., & Droit-Volet, S.
- Affiliations
- Unité de Nutrition Humaine (FR)
- Université de Bourgogne (FR)
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Rousset, S.
- Venue
- Appetite
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008-01
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 110-119
- ISSN
- 0195-6663 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2172067367
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 53
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 3.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Appetite (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique
- Conseil régional de Bourgogne-Franche-Comté
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Sensory Analysis and Statistical Methods
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Nutrition, Health and Food Behavior
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
- Keywords
- product familiarity, facial expressions, social environment, disgust, pleasure, gender differences, food liking
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Animals, Cattle, Facial Expression, Female, Food Preferences, Humans, Male, Meat Products, Photography, Sex Characteristics, Social Behavior, Swine, Recognition, Psychology
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review