A key challenge for climate change mitigation on the consumer side is to break habits that excessively lead to carbon emission. One of the culturally most robust human routines is the heavy reliance of the Western societies on conventional meat sources such as beef, pork, and poultry, which were recently accused of causing particularly high climate costs. In this light, the UN (FAO) has suggested the increasing use of insects as an alternative source of animal protein intended for human diets. Yet, insects have not reached the mainstream of Western cuisine. Currently, a frequent promotion strategy of insects is to highlight the Utilitarian benefits associated with their consumption (e.g., with respect to the environment or one's health). The present research addresses the efficacy of such claims in a consumer research study involving 180 participants recruited from the general population in Germany. Arguing based on social-cognitive research in the area of moral and environmental psychology, we hypothesized and found that a focus on beneficial, but temporally distant motives (e.g., health)—counterintuitively—decreases consumption in comparison to immediate, hedonic advertisements (e.g., tasty). Furthermore, our study provides process evidence suggesting pretrial expectations induced by a particular claim mediate the relationship between claims and consumption. Thus, the present research not only refutes a state-of-the-art approach in the promotion of insects as food, but also provides an alternative approach and process evidence by integrating psychological factors.
Anger has traditionally been associated with aggression and antagonistic behavior. A series of studies revealed that experiences of third-party anger (anger experienced when observing that harm is done to someone) can also lead to prosocial behavior. More specifically, three studies, hypothetical scenarios as well as a behavioral study, revealed that third-party anger can promote compensation of the victim. The results also showed a preference for such prosocial behaviors over antagonistic behaviors. We conclude that behaviors stemming from anger, whether antagonistic or prosocial, are reactions to inequity, albeit determined by the constraints of the situation.
Purpose
Entomophagy (i.e. human insect consumption) is seen as one promising route to substantially reduce food-related carbon footprints as insects can be produced at a fraction of the carbon emitted by traditional Western meat production (e.g. beef, pork, poultry). In this light, the purpose of this paper is to address how prices may affect preferences for insects as food.
Design/methodology/approach
Drawing on consumer research on “positive” functions of prices (e.g. the widely held belief that price and quality are positively correlated), the authors present two behavioural experiments that manipulated price cues to estimate the effect on expectations, eating behaviour and willingness-to-pay as central preference indicators.
Findings
Consistent with the predictions, high prices as initial anchors positively affect food preferences. Furthermore, they incur a positive spill-over effect to subsequent consumption of insects that are unprocessed (i.e. truffles in which mealworms are visible in their entity) and for which no price information is available. Additionally, the authors show that the positive effects of high prices on preferences are muted if prices are artificially lowered (e.g. by means of government subsidies, Experiment 2).
Practical implications
Taken together, the authors show that preferences for novel foods such as insects can be promoted by systematically taking into account behavioural economic theories. This suggests that behavioural theory can be used to reap environmental benefits of entomophagy.
Originality/value
This research links behavioural economics with the actual consumption of insects and therefore complements survey research on behavioural intentions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.