Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38933886›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2024

German consumers' attitudes toward artificial meat.

Anne-Katrin Jacobs, Hans-Wilhelm Windhorst, Julia Gickel, Sghaier Chriki, Jean-François Hocquette, Marie-Pierre Ellies-Oury

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Anne-Katrin JacobsScience and Innovation for Sustainable Poultry Production (WING), University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover (TiHo), Foundation, Field Station for Epidemiology (Bakum), Bakum, Germany.
Hans-Wilhelm WindhorstScience and Innovation for Sustainable Poultry Production (WING), University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover (TiHo), Foundation, Field Station for Epidemiology (Bakum), Bakum, Germany.
Julia GickelScience and Innovation for Sustainable Poultry Production (WING), University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover (TiHo), Foundation, Field Station for Epidemiology (Bakum), Bakum, Germany.
Sghaier ChrikiUniversité Clermont Auvergne, Institut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'Environnement (INRAE), VetAgroSup, UMR1213, Recherches sur les Herbivores, Theix, Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France.
Jean-François HocquetteUniversité Clermont Auvergne, Institut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'Environnement (INRAE), VetAgroSup, UMR1213, Recherches sur les Herbivores, Theix, Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France.
Marie-Pierre Ellies-OuryUniversité Clermont Auvergne, Institut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'Environnement (INRAE), VetAgroSup, UMR1213, Recherches sur les Herbivores, Theix, Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of sociodemographic characteristics on willingness to try (WTT), regularly eat (WTE), or pay (WTP) for artificial meat, its expected societal challenges and general acceptance as well as its future potential development in Germany. Answers to an online questionnaire by 3,558 potential German adult consumers were evaluated. About 63% of the respondents thought this novel food was promising/acceptable. The vast majority (70%) stated that they would be willing to try it, with the most important drivers being ethics, curiosity and eco-friendliness. Around 57% of the participants said they would be willing to eat artificial meat regularly. Most of the respondents (40%) were willing to pay the same price for artificial as for conventional meat. In terms of its future potential, almost 75% of respondents believed that this new product would become commercialized in more than five years and that it was perceived as a solution that is both more ethical (67%) and more environmentally friendly (58%) than traditional meat. In addition, there were significant impacts of demographic factors on the willingness to engage with artificial meat. For example, high WTT and WTE were found among young male respondents (18-30 years of age), males that rarely consumed meat or had a low income (< €1,500). This also applied to the female respondents, who, however, belonged to higher income classes. Young German consumers with a high level of education or income up to €3,000 as well as consumers who did not eat meat had a high WTP for this novel food. In addition, respondents' positive opinion and acceptance of artificial meat had a positive influence on WTT and WTP. These results are important for the discussion of a paradigm shift in global meat production with respect to sustainability, demand for meat and the adoption of new food products.

Indexed as

consumer perceptioncultured meatethicsnovel foodtraditional agriculture

Identifiers

PMID38933886
PMCPMC11199728

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.