Towards a reduced meat diet: Mindset and motivation of young vegetarians, low, medium and high meat-eaters

Boer, J. de; Schösler, Hanna; Aiking, H.

doi:10.1016/j.appet.2017.03.007

Cited by 175 publications

(140 citation statements)

References 83 publications

(78 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

113

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, as could be expected, flexitarian consumers are much more strongly driven by a willingness to reduce their consumption of animal products and to preserve the environment. Overall, these results are consistent with the results of a study by De Boer et al (2017) who found that low and medium meat‐eaters would reduce their meat consumption mainly because of health‐related and environmental reasons together with a need for variety . Accordingly, they differed from self‐declared vegetarians for whom taste and animal‐welfare were the two main reasons not to eat meat.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Overall, these results are consistent with the results of a study by De Boer et al (2017) who found that low and medium meat-eaters would reduce their meat consumption mainly because of health-related and environmental reasons together with a need for variety. 29 Accordingly, they differed from self-declared vegetarians for whom taste and animal-welfare were the two main reasons not to eat meat.…”

Section: Drivers and Barriers To Consumption Of High Plant Protein Prmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Consumer acceptance and sensory drivers of liking for high plant protein snacks

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Consumers are being encouraged to increase the proportion of plant protein in their diet to tend to a sustainable food system. Solutions could include developing a food rich in plant protein. However, these new products have an interest only if they are in accordance with expectation and the liking of consumers. In this context, extruded snack balls were developed to explore the sensory drivers of liking and barriers to consumption of formulated products with a high level of plant proteins. Eight different products varying in the type of cereal flour (rice or wheat) and pea flour content (from 60% to 90%) were developed following a factorial design. Eighty omnivore and 72 flexitarian consumers were recruited to evaluate the liking of these products. In addition, their sensory properties were described by a trained panel according to a profile method. RESULTS The cereal type had globally more influence on liking than the percentage of pea. However, liking was inversely correlated with pea flour content, regardless of the cereal type. The main drivers of liking are texture criteria (in particular crispy and puffy), whereas flavor perception (pea, green) constitutes a barrier to acceptance. Interestingly, very few differences of liking were observed depending on the diet of consumers even though the attitudes of flexitarian'towards such type of products differed from those of omnivores. We identified three clusters of consumers based on their preferences. Pea flavor acceptance or rejection could explain these clusters. Although most consumers rejected pea flavor, approximately 40% of the participants preferred the products with highest pea content. CONCLUSION The results of the present study will help provide guidance for innovative plant food design and formulation. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Drivers and Barriers To Consumption Of High Plant Protein Prmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consumer acceptance and sensory drivers of liking for high plant protein snacks

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Women appreciated the animal-based lunch more than men did in this study, which is surprising, since men are generally more likely to have a higher meat consumption and lower use of meat replacers [11,20,29,30]. The participants with the most frequent meat consumption (5 to 7 days per week) had a lower appreciation for the plant-based lunch than participants who consumed meat less frequently.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 59%

“…Tobler et al report that consumers do generally not see reducing meat consumption as environmentally beneficial: out of six options, limiting meat consumption was rated as the least environmentally beneficial in their study [10]. On the other hand, a study from the Netherlands has shown that one of the important reasons for meat eaters to limit meat consumption would be that it is better for the environment [11]. Sijtsema et al report that in the Netherlands willingness to adopt a vegetarian diet, or to replace meat with meat substitutes more often, is low [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Plant-Based Lunch at Work: Effects on Nutrient Intake, Environmental Impact and Tastiness—A Case Study

Kamp

Temme

2018

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The aim of this study was to determine the environmental impact, nutrient intake, appreciation and tastiness of three buffet-style lunches served at the workplace, consisting of (1) animal-based foods; (2) plant-based foods; and (3) both animal-based and plant-based foods. Employees of the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment in the Netherlands participated in the study. Participants scored the lunch for appreciation and tastiness (scores from 1 to 10). Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and land use associated with foods consumed were calculated using life cycle assessments. Nutrient intake was calculated using food composition data. The results show that both the plant-based and the combination lunch received higher scores for tastiness than the animal-based lunch. GHG emissions and land use were lowest for the plant-based lunch and highest for the animal-based lunch. The combination lunch was associated with increased fiber and decreased saturated fat intake compared to the animal-based lunch, but also lead to increased energy intake. The plant-based lunch did not increase energy intake, while increasing fiber intake and decreasing sodium (salt) and saturated fat intakes. These initial results show that plant-based lunches have the potential to improve nutrient intake and tastiness while reducing environmental impact. Additional research in this field is worthwhile.

show abstract

“…Dosadašnja ispitivanja ukazuju da, pored religijskih razloga, i nereligijski motivi mogu usloviti takvu ishranu: briga zbog okrutnosti prema životinjama, odvratnost prema mesu, običaji, verovanja i uticaj porodice ili autoriteta (3)(4)(5). Svest da vegetarijanstvo pomaže očuvanju životne sredine ima psihološku dimenziju (6).…”

Section: Uvodunclassified

Advantages and disadvantages of vegetarian nutrition

Nikolic¹,

Jovanović²,

Nikolic

2019

Zdravstvena zaštita

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SAŽETAKU modernom dobu najvažniji motivi za izbor vegetarijanstva su etički, zdravstveni, ekološki i hedonistički. Takođe, važnu ulogu imaju porodica i kulturološka tradicija. Većina radova ukazuje da se kod vegetarijanaca mnogo ređe javljaju kardiovaskularne i maligne bolesti, kao i dijabetes tip 2, u odnosu na nevegetarijance. Ovim načinom ishrane dolazi do redukcije telesne mase, hipertenzije i nivo LDLholesterola. Međutim, vegetarijanski način ishrane može biti povezan sa nedovoljnim unošenjem omega-3 polinezasićenih masnih kiselina, proteina, kalcijuma, cinka, gvožđa, vitamina B12 i vitamina D. Zdravstveni radnici moraju poznavati vegetarijanstvo dovoljno dobro kako bi pravilno savetovali pacijente kod izbora ovakvog načina ishrane. U mnogim smernicama za pravilno sprovođenje vegetarijanstva, a naročito veganizma naglašena je potreba za fortifikovanim namirnicama, a ponekad i dijetetskim suplementima. Upravo zbog svega navedenog, cilj ovog rada je bio da se sagledaju prednosti i nedostaci vegetarijanstva. SUMMARYIn the modern age, the most important motives for choosing vegetarianism are ethical, health, environmental and hedonistic. Family and cultural tradition also play an important role. Most studies indicate that cardiovascular and malignancies, as well as type 2 diabetes, are much less likely to occur in vegetarians than non-vegetarians. This diet leads to reduction of weight, hypertension and LDL cholesterol levels. However, the vegetarian diet may be associated with an insufficient intake of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids, protein, calcium, zinc, iron, vitamin B12 and vitamin D. Health care professionals need to be familiar with vegetarianism well enough to properly advise patients on their dietary choices. Many guidelines for the proper conduct of vegetarianism, and in particular veganism, emphasize the need for fortified foods and sometimes dietary supplements. Because of all of the above, the aim of this paper was to analyse the advantages and disadvantages of vegetarianism.

show abstract

Towards a reduced meat diet: Mindset and motivation of young vegetarians, low, medium and high meat-eaters

Cited by 175 publications

References 83 publications

Consumer acceptance and sensory drivers of liking for high plant protein snacks

Consumer acceptance and sensory drivers of liking for high plant protein snacks

Plant-Based Lunch at Work: Effects on Nutrient Intake, Environmental Impact and Tastiness—A Case Study

Advantages and disadvantages of vegetarian nutrition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About