The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Consumer Acceptance of Cultured Meat: An Updated Review (2018–2020)
Open accessAbstract
Cultured meat is one of a number of alternative proteins which can help to reduce the demand for meat from animals in the future. As cultured meat nears commercialization, research on consumers’ perceptions of the technology has proliferated. We build on our 2018 systematic review to identify 26 empirical studies on consumer acceptance of cultured meat published in peer-reviewed journals since then. We find support for many of the findings of our previous review, as well as novel insights into the market for cultured meat. We find evidence of a substantial market for cultured meat in many countries, as well as markets and demographics which are particularly open to the concept. Consumers mostly identified animal- and environment-related benefits, but there is plenty of potential to highlight personal benefits such as health and food safety. The safety of cultured meat and its nutritional qualities are intuitively seen as risks by some consumers, although some recognize potential benefits in these areas. Evidence suggests that acceptance can be increased with positive information, as well as frames which invoke more positive associations. We conclude by arguing that cultured meat will form one part of a varied landscape of future protein sources, each appealing to different groups of consumers to achieve an overall reduction in conventional meat consumption. We acknowledge a range of pro-cultured meat messaging strategies, and suggest that framing cultured meat as a solution to existing food safety problems may be an effective approach to increase acceptance. In the long-term, objections based in neophobia and norm violation will decrease, and widespread acceptance will depend in large part on the price and taste.
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
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
Self-citationCultured meat from stem cells: Challenges and prospects
Post, M. J. (2012) · Meat Science · doi:10.1016/j.meatsci.2012.04.008 · Cited by 780
Stephens, N., Di Silvio, L., Dunsford, I., Ellis, M., Glencross, A., & Sexton, A. (2018) · Trends in Food Science & Technology · doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2018.04.010 · Cited by 768
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
Self-citationA Survey of Consumer Perceptions of Plant-Based and Clean Meat in the USA, India, and China
Bryant, C., Szejda, K., Parekh, N., Deshpande, V., & Tse, B. (2019) · Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems · doi:10.3389/fsufs.2019.00011 · Cited by 529
Self-citationYour Morals Depend on Language
Costa, A., Foucart, A., Hayakawa, S., Aparici, M., Apesteguia, J., Heafner, J., & Keysar, B. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0094842 · Cited by 505
If you build it, will they eat it? Consumer preferences for plant-based and cultured meat burgers
Slade, P. (2018) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2018.02.030 · Cited by 469
Mathew, A. G., Cissell, R., & Liamthong, S. (2007) · Foodborne Pathogens and Disease · doi:10.1089/fpd.2006.0066 · Cited by 462
Attitudes to in vitro meat: A survey of potential consumers in the United States
Wilks, M., & Phillips, C. J. C. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0171904 · Cited by 397
Cited by
Acceptance of Insect-Based Food Products in Western Societies: A Systematic Review
Kröger, T., Dupont, J., Büsing, L., & Fiebelkorn, F. (2022) · Frontiers in Nutrition · doi:10.3389/fnut.2021.759885 · Cited by 269
Immortalizing Cells for Human Consumption
Soice, E., & Johnston, J. (2021) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms222111660 · Cited by 119
Metadata
- Authors
- Bryant, C., & Barnett, J.
- Venue
- Applied Sciences
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2020-07-28
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 5201
- ISSN
- 2076-3417 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3045933094
- Cited by
- 373
- References
- 54
- FWCI
- 27.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Consumer Acceptance of Cultured Meat: An Updated Review (2018–2020). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3390/app10155201
- The paper
- Bryant, C., & Barnett, J. (2020). Consumer Acceptance of Cultured Meat: An Updated Review (2018–2020). Applied Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10155201
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.