ReviewNature food2020
Consumer acceptance of novel food technologies.
Review in Nature food, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 144 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
144 citing papers in PubMed, 698 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding the Interaction between Regulatory Focus and Message Framing in Determining Chinese Consumers' Attitudes toward Artificial Meat.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Trial
- Plant-based meat alternatives can support reductions in agricultural land expansion and greenhouse gas emissions but entail micronutrient trade-offs.Nature food · 2026Article
- Valorisation of the HalophyteFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Consumer Attitudes, Knowledge, and Consumption Behaviours Toward Game Meat in Romania: Evidence from an Online Convenience Sample.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Evaluation of scaffold properties for cell-cultured food based on protein sources and their mixtures.Journal of animal science and technology · 2026Article
- Current Innovations in Meat Fermentation with a View to Producing More Sustainable, Healthier and Safer Products.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Smart Adsorption-Based Nanocatalysts for Active Food Packaging: A Critical Look at the Gap Between Concept and Application.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Breeding for beneficial microbial associations.Nature communications · 2026Review
- Sensory Drivers of Consumer Acceptance and Behavioural Responses to Baobab Fruit Pulp (Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Psychology of Eating the Future: Consumer Acceptance, Digital Influence and Behavioral Drivers of Novel Foods.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Technological Innovation and Consumer Trust: Understanding Safety Perceptions in Next Generation Probiotic Development.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Increasing the Acceptability of Insect-Based Foods as Future Foods: A Comprehensive Review of Barriers, Strategies, and Pathways to Mainstream Adoption.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2026Review
- Navigating adoption barriers for microbial proteins in future food.Nature communications · 2026Review
- The Use of Edible Insect Species Tenebrio molitor (Mealworm), Acheta domesticus (House Cricket), and Hermetia illucens (Black Soldier Fly) in the Food Industry: Nutritional Value, Safety Profile, and Consumer Acceptance.Current nutrition reports · 2026Review
- Consumers' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Sensory Perception of Soilless-Grown Strawberries in the Context of Sustainable Diet.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The next decade of alternative proteins.Nature food · 2026Article
- Promising Future of Engineered Probiotics for Antimicrobial Peptides and Protein Production: Prospects and Industrial Challenges.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Review
- Probiotics and Fermented Foods in Human Nutrition.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Heat-Induced Toxicants: Sensory Appeal Distracts Consumers' Attention From Potential Toxicological Risks of Thermally Processed Foods.Food science & nutrition · 2026Review
- Challenging the Biomimetic Promise 2.0: Negative Spillover of Bio-Inspired Versus Sustainability Framing on Public Perceptions of Bio-Inspired Technologies.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
84 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Novel food technologies are important for food security, safety and sustainability. Consumers, however, are often hesitant to accept them. In this narrative Review, we organize the research describing how heuristics and individual differences among consumers influence the acceptance of agri-food technologies. Associations evoked by a food technology, its perceived naturalness and trust in the industry using it influence consumer acceptance. Food neophobia, disgust sensitivity and cultural values are crucial personality factors for explaining individual differences. Using gene technology, nanotechnology, cultured meat and food irradiation as cases, we explore factors that may explain consumers' acceptance or lack of acceptance. Climate change, food supply shocks caused by crises such as pandemics and population growth are imminent threats to the food system. Therefore, disruptive food technologies will be needed to progress towards a more resilient food system. Taking into account the factors influencing consumers' perceptions of novel food technologies during the early stage of development and introduction will hopefully result in a higher acceptance of such technologies.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.