The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Challenges and prospects for consumer acceptance of cultured meat
Open accessAbstract
Consumer acceptance of cultured meat is expected to depend on a wide diversity of determinants ranging from technology-related perceptions to product-specific expectations, and including wider contextual factors like media coverage, public involvement, and trust in science, policy and society. This paper discusses the case of cultured meat against this multitude of possible determinants shaping future consumer acceptance or rejection. The paper also presents insights from a primary exploratory study performed in April 2013 with consumers from Flanders (Belgium) (n=180). The concept of cultured meat was only known (unaided) by 13% of the study participants. After receiving basic information about what cultured meat is, participants expressed favorable expectations about the concept. Only 9% rejected the idea of trying cultured meat, while two thirds hesitated and about quarter indicated to be willing to try it. The provision of additional information about the environmental benefits of cultured meat compared to traditional meat resulted in 43% of the participants indicating to be willing to try this novel food, while another 51% indicated to be ‘maybe’ willing to do so. Price and sensory expectations emerged as major obstacles. Consumers eating mostly vegetarian meals were less convinced that cultured meat might be healthy, suggesting that vegetarians may not be the ideal primary target group for this novel meat substitute. Although exploratory rather than conclusive, the findings generally underscore doubts among consumers about trying this product when it would become available, and therefore also the challenge for cultured meat to mimic traditional meat in terms of sensory quality at an affordable price in order to become acceptable for future consumers.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Development of a scale to measure the trait of food neophobia in humans
Pliner, P., & Hobden, K. (1992) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/0195-6663(92)90014-w · Cited by 2,137
Frewer, L. J., Bergmann, K., Brennan, M., Lion, R., Meertens, R., Rowe, G., Siegrist, M., & Vereijken, C. (2011) · Trends in Food Science & Technology · doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2011.05.005 · Cited by 424 · cited 2×
“Two recent reviews identified about 15 different issues impacting on consumer acceptance of novel agro-food technologies in general (Frewer et al. 2011; Rollin et al. 2011), while Hopkins and Dacey (2008) proposed about a dozen possible objections that might be provoked if a product like cultured…”
BackgroundCox, D. N., & Evans, G. (2008) · Food Quality and Preference · doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2008.04.005 · Cited by 397
Cited by
Future Protein Supply and Demand: Strategies and Factors Influencing a Sustainable Equilibrium
Henchion, M., Hayes, M., Mullen, A., Fenelon, M., & Tiwari, B. (2017) · Foods · doi:10.3390/foods6070053 · Cited by 1,519
Scientific, sustainability and regulatory challenges of cultured meat
Post, M. J., Levenberg, S., Kaplan, D. L., Genovese, N., Fu, J., Bryant, C. J., Negowetti, N., Verzijden, K., & Moutsatsou, P. (2020) · Nature Food · doi:10.1038/s43016-020-0112-z · Cited by 783
Structuring processes for meat analogues
Dekkers, B. L., Boom, R. M., & van der Goot, A. J. (2018) · Trends in Food Science & Technology · doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2018.08.011 · Cited by 751
Consumer acceptance of cultured meat: A systematic review
Bryant, C., & Barnett, J. (2018) · Meat Science · doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.04.008 · Cited by 532
Attached to meat? (Un)Willingness and intentions to adopt a more plant-based diet
Graça, J., Calheiros, M. M., & Oliveira, A. (2015) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2015.06.024 · Cited by 526
Metadata
- Authors
- Verbeke, W., Sans, P., & Van Loo, E. J.
- Venue
- Journal of Integrative Agriculture
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-02
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 285-294
- ISSN
- 2095-3119 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1969901407
- Cited by
- 355
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 15.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Challenges and prospects for consumer acceptance of cultured meat. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s2095-3119(14)60884-4
- The paper
- Verbeke, W., Sans, P., & Van Loo, E. J. (2015). Challenges and prospects for consumer acceptance of cultured meat. Journal of Integrative Agriculture. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2095-3119(14)60884-4
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.