Journal
FOOD QUALITY AND PREFERENCE
Volume 22, Issue 4, Pages 371-383Publisher
ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2011.01.008
Keywords
Meat substitutes; Meat replacers; Categorization; Free sorting; Grouping; New products; Vegetarian; Consumers
Categories
Funding
- Dutch Technology Foundation STW
Ask authors/readers for more resources
New meat substitutes need to be recognized as alternatives to meat. We therefore investigated which category representations consumers have of meat and meat substitutes. Thirty-four non-vegetarian participants performed a free sorting task with 17 meat products and 19 commercially available meat substitutes, followed by similarity and typicality ratings. Results indicated that categorization was largely influenced by the taxonomic classification of meat, so by categories that refer to the animal source like 'pork', 'beef' etc. Hence, meat substitutes were grouped separately from non-processed meat products. However, there were categories (e.g. 'pieces' and 'sausages') that contained both meat substitutes and processed meat products, as these products were perceived to be very similar. New meat substitutes should have a certain resemblance to meat in order to replace meat on the plate. This can be achieved by either similarity in appearance or by referring to shared scripts/goals, such as a similar application in meals. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available