Food Quality and Preference 96 (2022) 104440

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Food Quality and Preference

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/foodqual

Enabling sustainable plant-forward transition: European consumer

attitudes and intention to buy hybrid products
Marija Banovic a, *, Ada Maria Barone a, Daniele Asioli b, Simona Grasso c
a
MAPP Centre, Department of Management, Aarhus University, Fugelsangs Allé 4, 8210 Aarhus V, Denmark
b
Department of Applied Economics and Marketing, School of Agriculture Policy and Development, University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom
c
Institute of Food, Nutrition and Health (IFNH), University of Reading, Reading, United Kingdom

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Although recommendations for a transition towards more plant-forward diets have been proposed and despite
Hybrid products consumers reporting willingness to reduce meat consumption, consumer behaviour is frequently less environ­
Plant protein mentally sustainable than recommended. This calls for simpler strategies that may lead to a more optimistic view
Alternative protein
on both supply and demand side by using less rigid and more flexible approaches, such as hybrid products,
Sustainability
Consumer attitudes
combining meat and plant-based ingredients. Against this milieu, present study examines for the first-time in a
European countries cross-cultural context (Denmark, Spain, UK) and on a large consumer sample (N = 2766), attitudes and intention
to buy hybrid products, while taking into account consumers individual traits related to meat attachment, health
consciousness and environmental self-identity. Results show that hybrid products could be a crucial driver for
enabling a successful plant-forward transition, as the meat element in these products, together with consumers’
affinity and pleasure-seeking attitudes towards meat, would facilitate consumers’ acceptance of more sustainable
alternatives. Indeed, our results show that sensory perceptions play a major role in mediating the effect of
consumers’ attitudes on intention to buy hybrid products. Conversely, consumers’ environmental self-identity
and health consciousness have minimal to no effect on consumers’ attitudes towards hybrid products. Thus,
the results of our study support the value of strategies centring on bringing the best of two worlds: the plea­
surable sensory characteristics of the meat realm, and the healthiness and sustainability benefits of the plant
realm. In this sense, hybrid products could be an elegant initial approach adopted by practitioners and supported
by policy makers to enable a more nuanced transition from fully meat-based to plant-forward diets.

1. Introduction & Oliveira, 2015). According to recent European surveys, although

roughly 40% of consumers have intention to stop eating or cut down on
The sustainability of the meat sector is challenged with growing red meat consumption they still prioritize taste, food safety, and price
population, increasing purchase power, and its direct and indirect in­ over sustainability concerns (BEUC, 2020; EC, 2020b), opposing ambi­
fluence on environment and public health (Pais, Marques, & Fuinhas, tious aims of the Farm to Fork Strategy on creating a sustainable food
2020). Despite the latest stagnation in meat consumption patterns, system (EC, 2020a).
Europe has recorded the highest ever level of meat per capita con­ This trend in demand for meat is of importance and urgent concern
sumption, almost two times the world average (FAO, 2021). Further, it is for several reasons. Meat consumption, and red meat consumption in
expected that the increase in population and income will further lead to particular, has often been associated to a higher risk of non-
a higher shift towards meat consumption (Godfray et al., 2018; Sans & communicable diseases (NCDs), such as cardiovascular disease, can­
Combris, 2015). Although flexitarian, vegetarian, and vegan trends have cer, and diabetes (Godfray et al., 2018), while reduction of meat and
been observed (Spencer & Guinard, 2018), meat seems to be a preferred more plant-based diet is often suggested (de Boer & Aiking, 2020). On
option for many consumers due to its tradition, nutritional value, con­ the other hand, unlike plant proteins, meat is an excellent source of
venience, and affordability (Allievi, Vinnari, & Luukkanen, 2015), and nutrients such as phosphorus and zinc, while having complete protein
many consumers do have a strong attachment to meat (Graça, Calheiros, with a good balance of all necessary amino acids (Bohrer, 2017).

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Banovic).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104440
Received 19 August 2021; Received in revised form 1 October 2021; Accepted 13 October 2021
Available online 16 October 2021
0950-3293/© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
M. Banovic et al. Food Quality and Preference 96 (2022) 104440

Nonetheless, livestock production is a major contributor to the envi­ displays and settings that could appeal to the specific consumer’s traits
ronmental pressure through land occupation, water use, and greenhouse such that consumers could swiftly form favourable attitudes towards
gas (GHG) emissions (Pais et al., 2020). Due to the meat production and hybrid products.
demand complexity, calls have been made towards reduction of such Based on the above, the hybrid products involving meat (as burgers)
agriculture practices, seen as an obstacle to the achievement of sus­ are defined as products where part of the meat is replaced with other
tainability goals (EC, 2020a). This is particularly challenging as meat more sustainable plant-based sources such as vegetables and legumes
and livestock production contribute substantially to the European (Barone et al., 2021; Grasso & Jaworska, 2020; Neville, Tarrega, Hew­
economy, making up 45% of the European agricultural production value son, & Foster, 2017; Tarrega, Rizo, Murciano, Laguna, & Fiszman,
(Breuer, Martin, Wierig, & Saggau, 2019). Furthermore, it has been 2020). These hybrid products could be produced in different ways,
suggested that a reduction in meat consumption would severely distress depending on the utilized meat and plant-based ingredients, thus vary­
and impose complex challenges for the EU livestock industry, and in ing in shape and nutritional value (Neville et al., 2017). In the broader
particular the beef sector (Santini, Ronzon, Perez Dominguez, Araujo sense, hybrid products can also be seen as a meat substitute, since they
Enciso, & Proietti, 2017). replace part of the meat (Neville et al., 2017). In this sense, some of the
Given the cornucopia of environmental and health effects of meat factors that affect acceptance of the meat substitutes might be similar to
consumption, as well as the effect the reduction of red meat would have those affecting hybrid products. For instance, prior research has shown
on the economy, together with the apparent clash of consumers’ sym­ that meat attachment, intended as the positive bond towards meat
pathy for meat reduction and the attachment to meat, it is surprising that consumption, is a significant predictor of consumers’ willingness to
policy makers demonstrate little interest in less black and white strate­ consume plant-based alternatives (Circus & Robison, 2019; Graça et al.,
gies which could alleviate the transition towards more sustainable 2015). In particular, meat attachment entails consumers’ affinity to­
eating practices. The recognition of more courses of actions towards a wards meat consumption and the view of meat as a source of pleasure (i.
plant-forward diet entails that the debate around meat should not only e., hedonism), but also consumers’ feelings of entitlement towards and
include “rigid” sustainable consumption and strategies. Such a narrow dependence on meat consumption. This reflects the strong centrality of
focus simply restricts the consideration of sustainability and produces meat consumption in Western diets (Spencer, Kurzer, Cienfuegos, &
frustration about the support from consumers and industry actors. More Guinard, 2018), which translates in consumers developing an affective
flexible approaches involving simple strategies as producing “less but connection towards meat and in their subsequent reluctance to change
better” and “less but varied” (Pais et al., 2020) would lead to a more their consumption habits (Graça et al., 2015). Along these lines,
optimistic view on both the supply and demand side. Considering that ensuring that plant-based alternatives maintain desirable sensory attri­
reduction of meat consumption is necessary (EC, 2020a), the meat butes is fundamental for a successful change in dietary choices (de Boer,
sector, confronted with this imminent dilemma of transforming or die Schösler, & Aiking, 2018; Spencer et al., 2018). Indeed, the sensory
trying, should adapt its approach to these new market signals. Here, properties of plant-based products have been shown to play an impor­
simple strategies that could help the supply, as well as the demand side, tant role in consumers’ acceptance of these products (De Bakker &
could be as down-to-earth as substituting part of the meat with plant- Dagevos, 2012; Neville et al., 2017), such that sensory appeals have
based ingredients, and introducing hybrid products. These could lead been proven more successful than health and environmental claims
to both reduction in meat production and consumption indorsing (Marty, Chambaron, Nicklaus, & Monnery-Patris, 2018; Spencer, Rowe,
healthier and more sustainable dietary habits, while preserving the Bonnell, & Dalton, 2021).
livestock industry and the environment. This is especially important in The advantage of hybrid products is that they bring the best of two
the light of the enormous pressure the meat sector is already facing in now opposing meat/plant worlds, carrying both aura of good taste and
providing more choices and value-added solutions that are healthy and/ nutrition (Bohrer, 2017; Graça et al., 2015; Tarrega et al., 2020), as well
or more environmentally friendly, while at the same time gaining con­ as healthiness and sustainability (Banovic et al., 2018; de Boer & Aiking,
sumer support (Otto, Strenger, Maier-Nöth, & Schmid, 2021; Pais et al., 2020). At the same time, it supports the suggested smaller portions of
2020). meat supplemented with more plant protein (de Boer & Aiking, 2020; de
Boer, Schösler, & Aiking, 2014). Furthermore, it provides more di­
1.1. Hybrid products definition, benefits and barriers versity, and a more flexible approach to enable a sustainable plant-
forward transition. Indeed, previous research has found that hybrid
Recently, new food hybrid products have been launched in the Eu­ products are generally liked because of their sensory attributes, with
ropean and the US market that make it possible to supplement consumer consumer acceptability levels being in line with full meat products,
meat or dairy intake with plant-based ingredients. Examples of these whereas plant-based meat analogues are found to be less acceptable
hybrid products are Danish Crowns’ 50′ /50′ concept burgers, UK (Grasso, Rondoni, Bari, Smith, & Mansilla, 2021; Neville et al., 2017).
Applegate’s Well-Carved beef and veggie burger and Beyond Meat Hybrid products would thus allow and encourage a more nuanced plant-
burgers, but also Dairy Farmers of America’s lactose-free milks featuring forward transition of those consumers with an attachment to meat who
50:50 blends of plant-based milk and cow’s milk in the US, offered both would like to decrease the meat consumption but do not want to
in the supermarkets and restaurants (Fortune, 2019; Southey, 2021; compromise on the taste and sensory reward (Circus & Robison, 2019;
Watson, 2020). Hybrid products are thus largely defined as products Graça et al., 2015). This will generate more sustainable dietary habits,
that possess attributes of more than one product category. As hybrid but also have a positive influence on individual health, reducing the
products possess attributes of more than one product category, con­ rates of NCDs, and obesity (Godfray et al., 2018). Research also shows
sumers might potentially assign them to different product categories that the substitution of up to 50% of meat (namely beef) with plant-
(Rajagopal & Burnkrant, 2009). This could be a challenge for hybrid based sources would achieve substantial reduction in GHG emissions,
products as consumers might assign them to a single pre-existing depletion of natural resources, water consumption, and land occupation
product category based on its ingredients it or how well it resembles (Goldstein et al., 2017). In this sense, hybrid products would not only
the prototype of a particular product category (Gregan-Paxton, Hoeffler, contribute to the mitigation of climate change, but would also ease the
& Zhao, 2005). This affinity could initially reduce the appeal of a hybrid challenges of the EU livestock sector towards a more sustainable man­
product, as it competes with other products that are more prototypical agement of natural resources (Santini et al., 2017), while providing a
(e.g. fully meat-based products), but on the other hand could also more diverse and added-value choice for consumers (Lang, 2020;
resonate with some consumers who would like to decrease the con­ Spencer et al., 2021). However, it is still unclear whether the option of
sumption of meat. Therefore, the understanding of the above could help products blending meat and plant-based ingredients would encounter
retailers and manufacturers of existing hybrid products to build suitable resistance from consumers who are regular meat eaters (De Boer,

2
M. Banovic et al. Food Quality and Preference 96 (2022) 104440

Schösler, & Boersema, 2013), because of the clash between the benefits Guinard, 2018), we expect that the extent to which consumers see
of more plant-forward options and meat having a central place in their themselves as a type of person who acts environmentally-friendly affects
diets. their plant-based attitude and their attitude towards hybrid products
Nonetheless, these barriers to the consumption of plant-based al­ (Cheah, Shimul, Liang, & Phau, 2020; Van der Werff, Steg, & Keizer,
ternatives might be attenuated when it comes to hybrid products as 2013). Fig. 1 shows the overall conceptual framework.
there is a meat component in the product (De Bakker & Dagevos, 2012). Based on the proposed conceptual framework (Fig. 1), the main aim
Unlike fully plant-based products, hybrid products are perceived as of the study was to examine whether consumers’ intention to buy hybrid
having the same sensory attributes of full meat products (Lemken, products would be affected by consumers’ plant-based attitudes, their
Spiller, & Schulze-Ehlers, 2019; Neville et al., 2017), suggesting that expectations concerning sensory perceptions of and attitudes towards
these products could help the transition of sceptical consumers from hybrid products. We further investigate whether plant-based attitude
100% meat products to a more plant-forward diet (De Bakker & Dag­ and attitude towards hybrid products would mediate the effect of indi­
evos, 2012; Tarrega et al., 2020). Previous research has shown that vidual consumer traits, namely meat attachment (i.e., affinity, hedo­
substituting 50% or 80% of beef with plant-based ingredients maintains nism, dependence and entitlement), health consciousness, and
consumer acceptance ratings (Guinard et al., 2016; Myrdal Miller et al., environmental self-identity on intention to buy. Finally, we also test
2014; Spencer & Guinard, 2018). Furthermore, regular meat eaters are whether sensory perceptions towards hybrid products mediate the
often not willing to reduce their meat consumption and find it hard to relationship between plant-based attitude and attitude towards hybrid
follow a strictly vegetarian or vegan diet (Spencer et al., 2018) but they products.
are interested in finding new ways for eating healthier (Lang, 2020). The presented model in Fig. 1 has been tested across three selected
Indeed, meat consumers report the same level of health consciousness as European countries, namely Denmark (DK), Spain (ESP), and the UK.
consumers who still moderately eat meat but also consume fully plant- The country selection was based on the main markets where hybrid
based alternatives (Hoek, Luning, Stafleu, & de Graaf, 2004). Howev­ products are already present (DK; Fortune, 2019), important growing
er, it is an open question whether consumers’ health consciousness af­ markets (the UK; Mintel, 2019), and potential market (ESP).
fects their attitude toward partially substituted meat, despite hybrid
products providing a healthier solution without the need for a drastic 2. Methodology
dietary shift. Some indications from prior research show that a flex­
itarian diet could be a viable approach, which might allow for a large 2.1. Hybrid product selection
share of the population to practice a more plant-forward diet (de Boer
et al., 2018; Sogari et al., 2021; Spencer & Guinard, 2018). This would Stimulus for hybrid products was developed based on the existing
ultimately have a greater benefit for both public health and environment products on the market (i.e., 50% beef, 50% plant-based ingredients;
than the change brought up by a small number of individuals following Fortune, 2019) and previous consumer research in the selected countries
vegetarian or vegan diets (Pais et al., 2020). Finally, while prior research (Barone et al., 2021). This research has shown that consumers positively
has extensively explored the role of consumers’ concern for the envi­ perceive and would be willing to accept hybrid products having partial
ronment and its impact on moving towards more plant-forward diets meat-substitution with plant-based ingredients (preferable 50/50
(Banovic & Otterbring, 2021; de Boer et al., 2018; Goldstein et al., 2017; concept), with beef being preferred as base meat, and bean and oat
Spencer et al., 2021), there is a lack of research about how this could protein being favoured as plant-based ingredients. This is in line with
influence consumers’ attitude towards hybrid products. Yet, the limited previous consumer studies showing that oat, but also rapeseed and soy
evidence available hints that consumers with a higher level of care for protein, could be an acceptable - sustainable and healthy - source of
nature could be the ones more willing to choose meals with reduced plant protein (Banovic et al., 2018; Banovic & Otterbring, 2021; Banovic
meat content (De Boer et al., 2013), thus potentially perceiving hybrid & Sveinsdóttir, 2021). Building on this evidence, we included bean, pea,
products as more acceptable. From now on when referring to the hybrid oat, rapeseed, and soy protein as potential plant-based ingredients.
product(s), we are referring to the hybrid meat product(s).
2.2. Participants
1.2. Conceptual framework and aim of the study
Prior the study launch, ethical approval was granted by the Uni­
Based on the above and focusing on regular meat eaters, we expect versity’s ethical committee. A total of 2766 participants were subse­
that the intention to buy hybrid products is influenced by the con­ quently recruited across selected countries (i.e., DK, ESP, and the UK) to
sumers’ attitude towards a plant-based diet. This is in line with evidence participate in an online survey, with approximately 900 participants per
showing that hybrid products could be considered as a meat substitute, country. All the data across selected countries was collected through
while at the same time having the properties of and allowing consumers Qualtrics software using representative samples of the Danish, Spanish
to enjoy meat (e.g. de Boer et al., 2018). Consistently, we expect that the and the UK population recruited via an ESOMAR (European Society for
effect of plant-based attitude on attitude and intention to buy hybrid Opinion and Marketing Research) accredited market research agency
products is mediated by consumers’ sensory perception of hybrid (ICC/ESOMAR, 2016). The selected participants were main decision
products, as meat eaters consider these products and regular meat makers or sharing the responsibility for household food purchases.
equally acceptable in terms of their sensory properties (Neville et al., Participants were also meat consumers, as the goal of the study was to
2017; Spencer & Guinard, 2018; Tarrega et al., 2020). This is especially target low to heavy meat and beef consumers and assess their tendency
true for those consumers with attachment to meat, in the sense that they for buying hybrid products. Thus, participants who did not consume
feel an affinity towards the positive attributes of meat and they view it as meat were screened out from the survey. As seen from Table 1, there was
a source of pleasure (hedonism), while also perceiving its consumption as no significant differences across countries in terms of age and gender,
a right (entitlement) and a necessity (dependence) (Graça et al., 2015). with average age of 42 years and having around 51% of female partic­
Thus, we expect that meat attachment has an influence on consumers’ ipants across countries. As expected, differences across countries have
plant-based attitude and attitude toward hybrid products. Nonetheless, been observed for meat consumption in accordance with FAO (2021),
meat eaters are often looking for healthier options without reducing where Spain had a highest consumption frequency of total meat, fol­
their meat consumption (Lang, 2020); thus, we expect that health con­ lowed by Denmark, and the UK.
sciousness influences consumers’ plant-based attitude and their attitude
towards hybrid products. Similarly, given the more sustainable nature of
hybrid products, when compared to traditional meat (Spencer &

3
M. Banovic et al. Food Quality and Preference 96 (2022) 104440

Fig. 1. Conceptual framework.

2.3. Procedure and measures each measured on a seven-point bipolar scale (1 = very unlikely, 7 =
very likely) (Van der Werff et al., 2013). The survey finished with par­
An online questionnaire was distributed in Denmark, Spain, and the ticipants’ socio-demographic characteristics (Table 1).
UK, where participants were first introduced to the study, asked for their
consent, and screened-out based on their meat consumption. Measures
and stimulus, originally developed in English, were translated into 2.4. Data analysis
Spanish and Danish, using a double-back-translation method with in­
dependent translators to ensure all meanings were the same across the The model in Fig. 1 was tested by using a multi-group structural
three countries. In accordance with the hypothesized conceptual equation modelling (SEM) in AMOS 27.0, using the country as a
framework (Fig. 1), and after reading and signing the informed consent, moderator (Byrne, 2013). Besides measures presented in Fig. 1, age,
participants were shown a series of questions measuring individual gender, and consumption frequency of meat, beef, and plant-based
traits, plant-based attitude, sensory perception of hybrid product, atti­ products have been additionally used as the control variables for the
tude toward hybrid product, and intention to buy hybrid product. All the dependent variable – i.e., intention to buy hybrid products. A confir­
measures are shown in Table 2. Specifically, four factors were used to matory factor analysis (CFA) was first conducted to test for reliability
assess individual meat attachment (Graça et al., 2015), namely affinity (4 and validity of underlying measures presented in Fig. 1 and Table 2, (Hu
items), dependence (5 items), entitlement (3 items), and hedonism (4 & Bentler, 1999). To establish convergent and discriminant validity, as
items), all assessed on a seven-point Likert scales (1 = strongly disagree, well as reliability, of the measurement model we assessed the Composite
7 = strongly agree). Subsequently, health consciousness (Michaelidou & Reliability (CR), Average Variance Extracted (AVE), Maximum Shared
Hassan, 2008) was assessed using 4 items, while environmental self- Variance (MSV), as well as inter-construct correlations, where the
identity with 3 items (Van der Werff et al., 2013) on seven-point Likert threshold for these values are as follows: CR > 0.7, AVE > 0.5, MSV <
scales (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree). Further, participants’ AVE, and square root of AVE greater than inter-construct correlations
plant-based attitude was assessed through 7 items also on a seven-point (Byrne, 2013). Further, we assessed the measurement invariance across
Likert scales (1 = strongly disagree, 7 = strongly agree) to account for groups through configural, metric, and scalar invariance based on
barriers and facilitators towards adopting a more plant-based diet changes in the model fit (Steenkamp & Baumgartner, 1998). Further, we
(Reipurth, Hørby, Gregersen, Bonke, & Cueto, 2019). To be able to tested multi-group moderation (i.e., country differences) using critical
measure consumers’ perceptions, attitudes, and intention to buy hybrid ratios and chi-square difference test (Gaskin, 2019). Finally, the possible
product, participants were first presented with the definition of a hybrid mediation effects were evaluated using user-defined estimand and plu­
burger stating that this is a product in which part of the beef is replaced gin for AMOS (Gaskin, James, & Lim, 2020). To assess the model fit,
the plant-based ingredients, such as bean, pea, oat, rapeseed, or soy several Goodness-of-Fit (GOF) measures have been applied (Byrne,
proteins. Subsequently, participants were exposed to a picture of a 2013): chi-square divided by degrees of freedom (χ2/df < 5), root mean
hybrid burger together with a description defining the composition of square error of approximation (RMSEA < 0.05), goodness-of-fit index
the product (i.e., “50% plant-based, 50% beef”, see Fig. 2). After the (GFI > 0.95), comparative fit index (CFI > 0.95), and Tucker–Lewis
image, we measured participants’ sensory perceptions with 3 items on a Index (TLI > 0.95).
seven-point bipolar scale (1 = very poor, 7 = very good) (Elder &
Krishna, 2010). Attitude towards hybrid product was assessed with a 3- 3. Results
items bipolar scale (1 = negative, 7 = positive; 1 = unfavourable, 7
= favourable; and 1 = bad, 7 = good) (Kees, Burton, & Tangari, 2010). 3.1. Cross-country differences
Finally, intention to buy hybrid products contained likelihood of buying
five plant-based ingredients: bean, pea, oat, rapeseed, or soy protein, When looking at meat attachment factors (Table 2), it appears that
participants across all countries scored higher on those factors related to

4
M. Banovic et al. Food Quality and Preference 96 (2022) 104440

Table 1 for the dependence factor was the lowest (MDependence = 4.10), and no
Sociodemographic characteristics and consumption frequency of the significant differences were observed, meaning that all participants did
participants. not feel particularly dependent on meat being a necessity in their diet
Characteristics TotalN Denmark SpainN UKN p– (MDep.DK = 4.05, MDep.ESP = 4.14, MDep.UK = 4.11). In terms of health
= 2766 N = 947 = 928 = 891 valuex consciousness and environmental self-identity, participants reported
more concern about their health rather than the environment (MHealth =
Gender (% female) 51.2 52.5 49.8 51.3 0.670 5.11, MEnv.SelfId = 4.68), with Spanish participants reporting the highest
Age (mean)y 41.7 41.8 42.0 41.5 0.615 score on both measures (MHealth.ESP = 5.37, MEnv.SelfId.ESP = 5.29).
Age (classes) (%)
Participants across the countries were generally impartial towards a
-≤31 23.0 26.6 19.5 22.8 <0.001
− 32–41 25.6 19.3 28.3 29.5 plant-based diet (MPlantbased = 4.05), in line with the sample being
− 42–51 26.2 27.5 28.0 23.1 composed of regular meat eaters. When shown the image of hybrid
− 52+ 25.2 26.6 24.2 24.6 products, overall sensory perception (MSensory = 4.90) and attitude
Marital status (%) (MAttitude = 5.05) towards hybrid products were generally positive, with
- married/co- 63.3 59.9 66.1 64.2
Spanish participants on average scoring the highest (MSensory.ESP = 5.34,
<0.001
habiting
- single-living with 9.8 4.4 16.4 8.8 MAttitude.ESP = 5.49), followed by the UK (MSensory.UK = 4.90, MAttitude.UK
parents = 4.97), and Denmark (MSensory.DK = 4.47, MAttitude.DK = 4.69). Intention
- single-living 23.5 33.1 12.4 24.8 to buy hybrid products was somewhat lower when compared to attitude,
independently
depending on the considered plant-based ingredient. Specifically,
- other (widowed, 3.4 2.6 5.2 2.2
divorced) intention to buy was the lowest when hybrid products contained rape­
Children (yes, %) 59.4 54.3 60.8 63.3 <0.001 seed (MRapeseed = 3.68) and soy (MSoy = 3.95) protein. This was
Education (%) particularly true for Spanish participants who showed lowest levels of
- primary school 2.8 6.0 1.1 1.1 <0.001 appropriateness for rapeseed protein (MRapeseed = 3.17), mainly due to
- secondary school 15 9.4 13.7 22.2
their lower levels of familiarity with this plant-based ingredient, while
- higher education 26.1 29.5 15.1 33.9
(not university) Danish participants had lower preference for soy protein (MSoy = 3.60).
- university (first 31.5 38.9 22.7 32.7 On the other hand, intention to buy hybrid products was highest when
degree, BSc) containing pea (MPea = 4.20), followed by bean (MBean = 4.15), and oat
- university 24.7 16.3 47.4 10.1
(MOat = 4.09) protein. Pea protein was preferred by Spanish participants
(postgraduate,
MSc, PhD) (MPea.ESP = 4.33), while bean protein was preferred among the UK
Financial situation 4.4 5.1a 3.9b 4.3c <0.001 participants (MBean.UK = 4.45) as an appropriate ingredient for the
(mean, scale 1- hybrid products. Among Danish participants both pea and bean proteins
poor;7-good)y were found as appropriate parts of the hybrid products (MPea.DK = 4.04;
MBean.DK = 4.07).
Consumption
frequency (%)
Meat 3.2. CFA and measurement invariance analysis
- once a week and 27.2 29.8 19.1 29.9 <0.001
less
A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to confirm the factor
− 2 to 4 times a week 36.7 15.9 46.3 48.8
− 5 times a week and 37.1 54.3 34.6 21.3 structure across countries and dimensional variance. As seen from
more Table 3, all the models show satisfactory GOF measures, and the factor
Beef <0.001 structure is supported across countries demonstrating dimensional
- once a week and 44.0 23.3 37.1 73.1 variance. All the observed measures loaded significantly on their un­
less
− 2 to 4 times a week 44.4 54.8 53.1 24.4
derlying latent constructs with the factor loadings ranging from 0.51 to
− 5 times a week and 11.6 21.9 9.8 2.6 0.98 (all ps < 0.001) across the constructs and countries (see Table 3).
more All the factors explained>50% of the variance of each measure, con­
Plant-based products <0.001 firming internal consistency. In terms of reliability and validity, first the
- once a week and 54.8 65.2 56.0 42.4
CR threshold of 0.70 was met on all factors and across countries. Second,
less
− 2 to 4 times a week 33.9 26.6 31.1 44.7 AVE was at all times>0.50 for all latent constructs and across countries,
− 5 times a week and 11.3 8.2 12.8 12.9 confirming convergent validity. Furthermore, MSV was lower than AVE
more for all latent constructs and across countries supporting discriminant
validity. Likewise, the AVE was always greater than inter-construct
x
p - value associated to the χ 2 - test. correlations across countries, thus further supporting discriminant val­
y
p - value associated to the F - test. idity. Finally, measurement invariance analysis showed that measures
a
Post-hoc Tukey t - test associated with F-test, means with different letters are were invariant across countries and the models had a good fit (uncon­
significantly different at p < 0.05 level. strained model: χ2/df = 3.63, RMSEA = 0.03, GFI = 0.98, CFI = 0.98,
TLI = 0.95) that provided reasonable evidence in support of measure­
attributes and pleasure associated with meat (i.e., affinity, hedonism), ment invariance (i.e. metric invariance: Δχ 2(52) = 64.59, p = 0.113;
while scoring lower on factors related to meat consumption perceived as scalar invariance: Δχ 2(80) = 94.45, p = 0.129), permitting a meaningful
a right and a necessity (i.e., entitlement, dependence). The factors that comparison between the countries.
stand out are the affinity to positive attributes associated to meat and
hedonism related to the pleasure of eating meat that show higher 3.3. Multi-group SEM
average means compared to other two meat attachment factors (MAffinity
= 5.58; MHedonism = 4.79). For the affinity factor, this was particularly A multi-group SEM was applied to estimate the model in Fig. 1, and
evident for Danish participants, who scored higher than those in the UK to account for differences between the countries, Table 4. The chi-square
and Spain (MAff.DK = 6.13 vs. MAff.ESP = 5.45 vs. MAff.UK = 5.12). difference test has been used to examine whether there is a difference
Conversely, Danish participants felt less entitled when asked about their between the groups at the model level and if comparisons across coun­
right to consume meat (MEnt.DK = 4.30) than Spanish (MEnt.ESP = 4.72) tries can be made. Thus, unconstrained model has first been assessed
and UK respondents (MEnt.UK = 4.66). The average score across countries where path coefficients were freely estimated across the countries,

5
M. Banovic et al. Food Quality and Preference 96 (2022) 104440

Table 2
Measures across the countries.
Measures TotalN ¼ 2766 DenmarkN ¼ 947 SpainN ¼ 928 UKN ¼ 891 p –value
mean α+ mean α mean α mean α
Affinity (MA1) 5.58 0.93 6.13a 0.90 5.45b 0.93 5.12c 0.93 <0.001
- By eating meat I’m reminded of the death and suffering of animals. (MAA1)*
- To eat meat is disrespectful towards life and the environment. (MAA2)*
- I feel bad when I think of eating meat. (MAA3)*
- - Meat reminds me of diseases. (MAA4)*
Dependence (MA) 4.10 0.83 4.05a 0.75 4.14a 0.87 4.11a 0.88 0.360
- I don’t picture myself without eating meat regularly. (MAD1)
- If I couldn’t eat meat I would feel weak. (MAD2)
- I would feel fine with a meatless diet. (MAD3)*
- If I was forced to stop eating meat, I would feel sad. (MAD4)
- Meat is irreplaceable in my diet. (MAD5)
Entitlement (MA) 4.55 0.89 4.30a 0.90 4.72b 0.90 4.66b 0.87 <0.001
- To eat meat is an unquestionable right of every person. (MAE1)
- According to our position in the food chain, we have the right to eat meat. (MAE2)
- Eating meat is a natural and undisputable practice. (MAE3)
Hedonism (MA) 4.79 0.94 4.89a 0.93 4.65b 0.95 4.82a 0.92 0.003
- To eat meat is one of the good pleasures in life. (MAH1)
- I love meals with meat. (MAH2)
- I’m a big fan of meat. (MAH3)
- A good steak is without comparison. (MAH4)
Health consciousness 5.11 0.89 5.03a 0.91 5.37b 0.91 4.93a 0.85 <0.001
- I reflect about my health a lot. (HC1)
- I’m very self-conscious about my health. (HC2)
- I’m alert to changes in my health. (HC3)
- I’m usually aware of my health. (HC4)
Environmental self-identity 4.68 0.94 4.07a 0.94 5.29b 0.94 4.68c 0.94 <0.001
- Acting environmentally-friendly is an important part of who I am. (ESI1)
- I am the type of person who acts environmentally-friendly. (ESI2)
- I see myself as an environmentally-friendly person. (ESI3)
Plant-based attitude 4.05 0.87 3.91a 0.89 4.15b 0.84 4.09b 0.89 <0.001
- It is good for the environment to eat more plant-based. (PBA1)
- Plant-based food tastes good. (PBA2)
- It is healthy to eat a plant-based diet. (PBA3)
- It is easy to eat plant-based in social situations. (PBA4)
- It is cheap to eat a more plant-based diet. (PBA5)
- I get enough protein if I eat a more plant-based diet. (PBA6)
- I become full from eating plant-based food. (PBA7)
Sensory perception of hybrid product 4.90 0.95 4.47a 0.94 5.34b 0.95 4.90c 0.94 <0.001
- Quality (SPQ1).
- Taste (SPT2).
- Delicious (SPD3).
Attitude toward hybrid product 5.05 0.97 4.69a 0.97 5.49b 0.97 4.97c 0.96 <0.001
- Negative/positive (ANP1).
- Unfavourable/favourable (AUF2).
- Bad/good (ABG3).
Intention to buy hybrid product 4.45 0.96 3.87a 0.94 3.98a,b 0.89 4.20b 0.93 <0.001
- Bean protein (IBB1).
- Pea protein (IBP2).
- Oat protein (IBO3)
- Rapeseed protein (IBR4)- Soy protein (IBS5).

p-value associated with the ANOVA test where country has been used as a factor.
*Reverse-scored items.
a,b,c
Posthoc Tukey t-tests associated with ANOVA, means with different letters are significantly different.
1
MA: Meat attachment.
+
Cronbach alpha.

exhibiting satisfactory GOF indices (χ 2/df = 2.20, RMSEA = 0.02, GFI = (β = − 0.32, p < .001). Conversely, the plant-based attitude was affected
0.99, CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.98). Further, the model has been constrained by the entitlement to eat meat only in Denmark (β = − 0.21, p < .001)
to be equal across the countries, where model comparison analysis and Spain (β = − 0.10, p < .01), and by hedonism only in the UK (β =
showed that groups (i.e., countries) are not different at the model level − 0.09, p < .05). As expected, consistently across all countries, plant-
(Δχ 2(56) = 69.82, p = .101) allowing for the analysis at the path level, based attitude was positively influenced by health consciousness and
where group (i.e., country) differences were assessed using chi-square environmental self-identity (all ps < 0.001), with a smaller effect of
difference test. health consciousness among Danish participants (β = 0.05, p < .05).
As seen from Table 4, the results show that plant-based attitude is When confronted with hybrid products, the meat attachment factors
strongly and negatively affected by affinity towards meat consumption had a lower explanatory power when it came to the attitude towards
followed by meat dependence, showing that meat attachment inhibits hybrid products; however, affinity and hedonism had a positive effect on
the participants’ openness towards plant-based diet. The strongest effect attitude. Specifically, affinity towards meat had a positive effect on the
of the affinity was observed among the Spanish (β = − 0.42, p < .001) attitude toward hybrid products in Spain (β = 0.08, p < .01) and in the
and the UK participants (β = − 0.39, p < .001), while dependence or UK (β = 0.06, p < .05), while hedonism had a positive effect in the UK (β
belief about the meat necessity was strongest among the UK participants = 0.14, p < .001). This indicated that presence of meat in hybrid

6
M. Banovic et al. Food Quality and Preference 96 (2022) 104440

hybrid products across all three countries (all ps < 0.01). Conversely,
plant-based attitude mediates the effect of entitlement in Denmark and
Spain, and the effect of hedonism in the UK. Additionally, the same
mediating effect of plant-based attitude was observed for the environ­
mental self-identity across all countries, whereas for health conscious­
ness this was supported only for Spain and the UK (all ps < 0.01). Finally,
sensory perceptions of hybrid products mediate the influence of plant-
based attitude on both attitude and intention to buy hybrid products
across all countries (all ps < 0.01). This further confirms the key role of
sensory perceptions in the understanding of attitudes and behavioural
intentions towards hybrid products.

4. Discussion

This is the first cross-cultural study to investigate European con­

sumers’ attitudes and intention to buy hybrid products involving blend
of meat and plant-based ingredients, shedding light on this largely
Fig. 2. Hybrid product.
neglected area of study about these sustainable products. Within this
research, we have found considerable evidence that hybrid products
products may override the consumers’ negative taste perceptions could be a crucial catalyst for enabling successful plant-forward transi­
compared to fully plant-based alternatives. On the contrary, dependence tion and reduce reluctance towards consumption and negative percep­
on meat consumption can negatively affect attitude, which was evident tions of plant-based alternatives (Neville et al., 2017; Tarrega et al.,
in the UK (β = -0.17, p < .05). Health consciousness had no significant 2020). Indeed, we show that regular meat consumers have positive
effect on the attitude towards hybrid products (all ps > 0.05), while there sensory perception, high attitude towards and high intention to buy
was a significant effect of environmental self-identity only in the UK (β hybrid products. This indicates that even though hybrid products
= 0.07, p < .05), pointing that UK participants saw the hybrid products possess attributes of more than one product category (i.e. both meat and
as a potentially more environmentally friendly product. plant-based ingredients), consumers likely categorized them and
Plant-based attitude positively affected participants’ attitude to­ perceive them as more prototypical of the meat category. This suggests
wards hybrid products in Denmark (β = 0.10, p < .001) and in the UK (β that hybrid products that better resemble the prototype of a particular
= 0.07, p < .05). This suggests that, even though regularly eating meat, product category could invoke more favourable attitudes and accep­
in these countries participants open towards a plant-based diet still tance (Gregan-Paxton et al., 2005; Rajagopal & Burnkrant, 2009).
consider hybrid products as acceptable. Specifically, this effect was Indeed, we further show that this effect is robust and does not reduce the
explained by the sensory perceptions of hybrid products, which are appeal of a hybrid product as it holds even among consumers highly
influenced by the plant-based attitude and in turn affect attitude to­ attached to meat. Specifically, we found that even consumers with
wards hybrid products (all ps > 0.001). This shows that sensory per­ higher affinity towards meat sensory attributes and pleasure associated
ceptions of hybrid products play an important role in an overall with meat consumption (i.e., hedonism) had substantially positive at­
assessment of the hybrid product acceptability. titudes towards hybrid products. This corroborates findings from pre­
Finally, as presumed, the intention to buy hybrid products was vious studies showing that substituting meat with plant-based
affected by participants’ plant-based attitude and their sensory percep­ ingredients might sustain consumer acceptance and prevent the nega­
tions of and attitude towards hybrid products (all ps > 0.001). While tive taste perceptions associated with fully plant-based alternatives
there was no difference between the countries in terms of sensory per­ (Guinard et al., 2016; Lemken et al., 2019; Marty et al., 2018; Myrdal
ceptions, the attitude towards hybrid products had a varying effect on Miller et al., 2014; Spencer & Guinard, 2018; Tarrega et al., 2020),
the intention to buy. Specifically, the strongest effect was observed in leading to more sustainable diets (Pais et al., 2020). In line with the
Denmark (β = 0.35, p < .001), followed by the UK (β = 0.25, p < .001), previous, we also show that different plant-based ingredients can have
and Spain (β = 0.14, p < .001). varying effect on the intention to buy hybrid products, suggesting the
role that familiarity, prototypicality, and previous experience with this
3.4. Control variable effects product category have in affecting consumers’ acceptance of these
products (Banovic & Otterbring, 2021; Banovic & Sveinsdóttir, 2021;
Concerning control variables (Table 4), age was only significant in Rajagopal & Burnkrant, 2009; Tarrega et al., 2020).
Denmark, negatively influencing intention to buy hybrid products (β = In terms of cross-country differences, the above effects hold across
− 0.05, p < .05), and showing that younger participants have a higher countries showing that sensory perceptions of hybrid products highly
interest towards hybrid products than older participants do. The effect of affect an overall attitude towards hybrid product with stronger effect
gender was only significant in the UK (β = − 0.08, p < .01), with male among the UK consumers when compared to Danish and Spanish con­
participants being more prone to purchase hybrid products when sumers. Sensory perceptions also mediate the effects of different beliefs
compared to their female counterparts. Consumption frequency of plant- about plant-abased ingredients on both attitude and intention to buy
based products significantly affected purchase of hybrid products in hybrid products, with more prominent effect in Denmark and the UK.
Spain (β = 0.14, p < .001) but not in Denmark and UK. This demon­ We found that this effect of attitude towards plant-based diet on both
strates that those Spanish participants belonging to the flexitarian group attitude towards and intention to buy hybrid products was mediated by
(moderately eating meat), and who already buy and consume plant- sensory perception. This also corroborates previous research showing
based products would be more willing to try hybrid products than the significance of sensory appeal for reduced meat consumption and
those who are not experienced with plant-based products. that choosing mixed (hybrid) products could be a reliable option espe­
cially for consumers who are attached to meat (Tarrega et al., 2020;
3.5. Mediating effects Tucker, 2014). This is further supported in our study showing the
negative effect of meat attachment (i.e. affinity towards the positive
As seen from Table 4, plant-based attitude mediates the effect of the meat attributes) on overall plant-based attitude where the higher effect
meat attachment factors, affinity and dependence, on intention to buy was observed again among UK, as well as Spanish consumers. While the

7
M. Banovic et al. Food Quality and Preference 96 (2022) 104440

Table 3
Confirmatory factor analysis.
Measures Overall Denmark Spain UK
SE CR AVE MSV SE CR AVE MSV SE CR AVE MSV SE CR AVE MSV

Affinity 0.93 0.76 0.23 0.90 0.70 0.17 0.93 0.78 0.25 0.93 0.76 0.33
MAA1 0.90* 0.86 0.90 0.89
MAA2 0.86 0.78 0.90 0.88
MAA3 0.90 0.88 0.89 0.91
MAA4 0.83 0.82 0.85 0.80
Dependence 0.84 0.72 0.43 0.79 0.67 0.46 0.87 0.59 0.55 0.89 0.61 0.33
MAD1 0.58 0.51 0.81 0.84
MAD2 0.76 0.75 0.79 0.76
MAD3 0.54 0.57 0.51 0.55
MAD4 0.78 0.75 0.82 0.84
MAD5 0.89 0.89 0.87 0.87
Entitlement 0.89 0.73 0.50 0.90 0.75 0.53 0.90 0.76 0.51 0.87 0.68 0.48
MAE1 0.86 0.89 0.84 0.81
MAE2 0.87 0.88 0.88 0.84
MAE3 0.85 0.83 0.89 0.84
Hedonism 0.93 0.79 0.61 0.94 0.79 0.67 0.95 0.82 0.55 0.93 0.76 0.64
MAH1 0.91 0.91 0.93 0.89
MAH2 0.90 0.91 0.90 0.90
MAH3 0.92 0.93 0.92 0.93
MAH4 0.81 0.80 0.89 0.75
Health consciousness 0.89 0.68 0.25 0.91 0.71 0.13 0.91 0.71 0.34 0.86 0.60 0.33
HC1 0.81 0.83 0.79 0.80
HC2 0.85 0.90 0.89 0.79
HC3 0.81 0.79 0.84 0.77
HC4 0.82 0.85 0.86 0.74
Environmental self-identity 0.93 0.83 0.25 0.91 0.78 0.18 0.94 0.84 0.34 0.94 0.84 0.33
ESI1 0.92 0.89 0.90 0.91
ESI2 0.93 0.92 0.94 0.92
ESI3 0.89 0.83 0.90 0.92
Plant-based attitude 0.88 0.51 0.35 0.89 0.55 0.42 0.84 0.54 0.30 0.89 0.53 0.42
PBA1 0.70 0.74 0.69 0.67
PBA2 0.81 0.85 0.75 0.81
PBA3 0.78 0.82 0.77 0.74
PBA4 0.57 0.54 0.49 0.68
PBA5 0.55 0.61 0.42 0.57
PBA6 0.75 0.77 0.68 0.79
PBA7 0.78 0.81 0.74 0.81
Sensory perception HP1 0.96 0.89 0.73 0.96 0.89 0.66 0.96 0.89 0.72 0.96 0.88 0.78
SPQ1 0.93 0.95 0.92 0.91
SPT2 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96
SPD3 0.94 0.93 0.96 0.94
Attitude HP 0.98 0.95 0.73 0.99 0.96 0.66 0.98 0.93 0.72
ANP1 0.97 0.98 0.97 0.97 0.98 0.93 0.78
AUF2 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97
ABG3 0.98 0.98 0.97 0.97
Intention to Buy HP 0.92 0.70 0.34 0.94 0.77 0.35 0.90 0.63 0.30 0.93 0.73 0.37
IBP1 0.87 0.91 0.81 0.89
IBB2 0.89 0.92 0.87 0.88
IBO3 0.85 0.90 0.85 0.84
IBR4 0.77 0.86 0.64 0.84
IBS5 0.80 0.81 0.78 0.83
Goodness-of-fit (GOF)
measures
χ2/df 6.07 2.97 2.62 2.94
GFI 0.99 0.98 0.98 0.99
CFI 0.99 0.98 0.98 0.99
TLI 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.97
RMSEA 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.05
1
HP – Hybrid product; SE – Standardized Estimate; CR – Composite Reliability; AVE – Average Variance Extracted; MSV - Maximum Shared Variance. *All SE sig­
nificant at p < 0.001.

effects of sensory perceptions on consumer acceptance of hybrid prod­ and pleasure.

ucts have been documented in a few studies and generally linked to Additionally, we investigated whether consumers’ personal traits
product’s taste and sensory attributes (De Bakker & Dagevos, 2012; such as meat attachment, health consciousness and environmental self-
Neville et al., 2017; Spencer et al., 2021), previous literature on possible identity, would inhibit or facilitate consumers’ purchase intention to­
sustainable products has so far largely neglected the crucial role of wards hybrid products. As expected, our results confirmed that con­
sensory perceptions in plant-forward transition. We fill this gap by sumers’ plant-based attitude is negatively affected by meat attachment,
providing an explanation about why consumers’ buying behaviour is which could be a barrier for consumers’ openness towards plant-based
often less healthy and environmentally sustainable than expected, diet. Conversely, health consciousness and environmental self-identity
namely due to the low expectations about sensory attributes of sus­ have a strong positive effect. These findings seem quite natural since
tainable products and consumers’ unwillingness to compromise on taste consumers more attached to meat may have a more negative attitude

8
M. Banovic et al. Food Quality and Preference 96 (2022) 104440

Table 4
Multi-group SEM results and comparison between countries.
Dependent variable Predictor Overall Denmark Spain UK
SE R2 SE R2 SE R2 SE R2

Plant-Based Attitude (PBA) 0.37 0.44 0.33 0.41

Affinity (MA1) -0.31*** -0.20*** (a) -0.42*** (b) -0.39*** (b)
Dependence (MA) -0.23*** -0.25*** (a) -0.18*** (b) -0.32*** (a)
Entitlement (MA) -0.09*** -0.21*** (a) -0.10** (b) -0.01 (b)
Hedonism (MA) -0.01 -0.07(a) -0.03 (a) -0.09* (b)
Health Consciousness 0.12*** 0.05* (a) 0.14*** (b) 0.14*** (b)
Environmental Self-Identity 0.20*** 0.20*** (a) 0.19*** (a) 0.16*** (a)
Attitude towards HP (A) 0.57 0.57 0.50 0.61
Affinity (MA) 0.08*** 0.03 (a) 0.08** (a) 0.06* (a)
Dependence (MA) -0.02 -0.05 (a) -0.01 (a) -0.07* (a)
Entitlement (MA) -0.03 -0.03 (a) -0.01 (a) -0.03 (a)
Hedonism (MA) 0.05** 0.02 (a) 0.06 (a) 0.14*** (b)
Health Consciousness -0.01 -0.01 (a) -0.01 (a) -0.02 (a)
Environmental Self-Identity 0.06*** 0.02 (a) 0.05 (a) 0.07* (a)
Plant-Based Attitude 0.11*** 0.10*** (a) 0.03 (a) 0.07* (a)
Sensory Perceptions HP2 0.72*** 0.69*** (a) 0.68*** (a) 0.74*** (b)
2
Sensory Perceptions HP (SP) 0.15 0.19 0.16 0.18
Plant-Based Attitude 0.44*** 0.58*** (a) 0.21*** (b) 0.47*** (a)

Intention to Buy HP (IB) 0.45 0.47 0.38 0.53

Plant-Based Attitude 0.45*** 0.34*** (a) 0.58*** (b) 0.51*** (b)
Sensory Perceptions HP 0.19*** 0.16*** (a) 0.24*** (a) 0.21*** (a)
Attitude towards HP 0.25*** 0.35*** (a) 0.14*** (b) 0.25*** (c)
Control variables
Age -0.01 -0.05* (a) -0.02 (a) -0.04 (a)(b)
Gender -0.02 -0.02 (a) 0.02 (a) -0.08** (a)(b)
Cons. freq. meat 0.02 0.03 (a) 0.04 (a) 0.05 (a)
Cons. freq. beef 0.02 0.06* (a) -0.01 (a) -0.01 (a)(b)
Cons. freq. plant-based products 0.09*** 0.04 (a) 0.14*** (a) 0.05 (a)

Mediating effects
Affinity (MA) > PBA > IB -0.14*** -0.07*** -0.24*** -0.20***
Dependence (MA) > PBA > IB -0.10*** -0.09*** -0.10** -0.16***
Entitlement (MA) > PBA > IB -0.04** -0.07*** -0.06** -0.01
Hedonism (MA) > PBA > IB -0.01 -0.02 -0.02 -0.05*
Health Consciousness > PBA > IB 0.05*** 0.02 0.08*** 0.07***
Environmental Self-Identity > PBA > IB 0.09** 0.07*** 0.11*** 0.08***
Affinity (MA) > A > IB 0.02*** 0.01 0.02*** 0.02*
Dependence (MA) > A > IB -0.01 -0.02 -0.01 -0.02*
Entitlement (MA) > A > IB -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01
Hedonism (MA) > A > IB 0.01* 0.01 0.01 0.04***
Health Consciousness > A > IB -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01
Environmental Self-Identity > A > IB 0.02*** 0.01 0.01 0.02*
PBA > SP > A 0.32** 0.40*** 0.15** 0.35**
PBA > SP > IB 0.09** 0.10*** 0.05** 0.10***
PBA > A > IB 0.02*** 0.04** 0.01 0.01

***Significant at p < 0.001. **Significant at p < 0.01.*Significant at p < 0.05.

x
Path estimates with different letters across countries differ significantly at p < 0.001 level.
+
Factor loadings of the unobserved variable - Intention to Buy Hybrid Product (IB).
1
MA – Meat Attachment; 2HP – Hybrid Product.

towards a plant-based diet (Graça et al., 2015), while consumers with bringing the best of two worlds, specifically the good sensory charac­
higher levels of health and environmental consciousness would be more teristics of the meat realm, and the healthiness and sustainability of the
willing to choose a meatless diet (de Boer et al., 2014). While this result plant realm, could be an elegant initial strategy to be adopted by prac­
seems straightforward, and corroborates previous studies (Neville et al., titioners and supported by policy makers, for a more nuanced transition
2017), we further answer the open question of whether consumers’ from fully meat-based to a plant-forward diet. However, only if manu­
health and environmental consciousness affects consumers’ attitude facturers and retailers display hybrid products in places and settings in
towards new hybrid products with partial-substitution of meat. We find which these products evoke more familiarity with the meat product
that despite hybrid products offering a healthier and more environ­ category rather than plant-related product category, would consumers
mentally sustainable solution without the need for a radical dietary attached to meat be able to quickly use a single category inference
shift, this information is found less important by the consumers, with strategy and build more favourable attitudes.
this effect holding across all investigated countries and particularly
among Danish consumers. On the other hand, and as pointed above, the
consumer attachment to meat, does not reduce the appeal of a hybrid 4.1. Limitations and future research
product. In fact, hybrid products containing meat resonate well with
consumers attached to meat as they tend to use the meat component This study has focused on consumer’s attitudes and intention to buy
rather than the plant-based component as cue when judging the product, hybrid products, using real-world stimuli but without testing these
thus leading to more favorable attitudes (Gregan-Paxton et al., 2005). products in a real retail setting and accounting for actual consumer
This shows that the adoption of hybrid products, which centre on choices. Future research could address these limitations in several di­
rections. Consumers experiments with hybrid products and in a market

9
M. Banovic et al. Food Quality and Preference 96 (2022) 104440

setting (e.g., stores) using incentive-compatible methods, such as real reformulations that can help support transition of the boarder market
choice experiments (Macdiarmid, Cerroni, Kalentakis, & Reynolds, towards fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food practices.
2021), or multiple price list and experimental auctions (Asioli, Mignani,
& Alfnes, 2021) combined with sensory studies (Asioli et al., 2017),
CRediT authorship contribution statement
would be useful to provide more realistic information about consumer
preferences and willingness to pay for hybrid products. Further, in­
Marija Banovic: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation,
vestigations of communication messages where specific goals (e.g.,
Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing. Ada Maria Barone:
taste, health, and environment) could be taken into account may further
Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Writing – review &
allow for identifying persuasive paths for adoption of hybrid products.
editing. Daniele Asioli: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing.
Moreover, additional research is needed on the role of sensory proper­
Simona Grasso: Writing – review & editing, Funding acquisition.
ties and expectations of hybrid products, particularly focusing on spe­
cific plant-based ingredients that could further increase product
adoption. Finally, the replication of this study in other countries, espe­ Declaration of Competing Interest
cially non-European, would be further useful to deepen the under­
standing of consumers’ attitudes towards hybrid products. The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
5. Conclusions and managerial implications the work reported in this paper.

There are several important implications arising from our results that Acknowledgments
could help managers and policy makers understand the value of hybrid
products and how to successfully market them to consumers. The key This work was supported by EIT Food (https://www.eitfood.eu/)
finding of our study is that companies should focus on improvement and through the project “Consumer attitudes towards healthier processed
communication of the sensory characteristics and pleasure derived from meat products” (grant number: 20206, EIT Food Business Plan 2020).
taste, rather than the environmental and health benefits associated with
hybrid products. This is especially important as a common way for
References
policy makers and managers to increase consumers’ awareness about
meat consumption issues is through health and sustainability posi­ Allievi, F., Vinnari, M., & Luukkanen, J. (2015). Meat consumption and
tioning. For instance, managers usually identify positive features of new production–analysis of efficiency, sufficiency and consistency of global trends.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 92, 142–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
products, such as sustainability of plant-based alternatives, which might
jclepro.2014.12.075
differentiate them enough to attract consumers, and they expect that Asioli, D., Mignani, A., & Alfnes, F. (2021). Quick and easy? Respondent evaluations of
consumers will in turn adjust their behavior accordingly by reducing the Becker–DeGroot–Marschak and multiple price list valuation mechanisms.
meat consumption. Although this might appear as the natural decision, Agribusiness, 37(2), 215–234. https://doi.org/10.1002/agr.v37.210.1002/agr.21668
Asioli, D., Varela, P., Hersleth, M., Almli, V. L., Olsen, N. V., & Naes, T. (2017).
to reach a broader market and those consumers attached to meat, A discussion of recent methodologies for combining sensory and extrinsic product
products that conflict with existing consumption habits are unlikely to properties in consumer studies. Food Quality and Preference, 56, 266–273. https://
be used (BEUC, 2020; EC, 2020b), with the result that consumers’ doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.12.075
Banovic, M., Arvola, A., Pennanen, K., Duta, D. E., Brückner-Gühmann, M.,
buying behaviour is often less environmentally sustainable than rec­ Lähteenmäki, L., & Grunert, K. G. (2018). Foods with increased protein content: A
ommended (Otto et al., 2021). Indeed, even though hybrid products are qualitative study on European consumer preferences and perceptions. Appetite, 125,
desirable healthy and sustainable alternatives, our study shows that 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2018.01.034
Banovic, M., & Otterbring, T. (2021). Athletic abs or big bellies: The impact of imagery,
sensory perceptions are crucial for consumer acceptance and should arousal levels, and health consciousness on consumers’ attitudes towards plant-
form an integral part of successful new hybrid product development. based protein products. Food Quality and Preference, 87, 104067. https://doi.org/
Therefore, for a broader market and especially for those consumers 10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.104067
Banovic, M., & Sveinsdóttir, K. (2021). Importance of being analogue: Female attitudes
attached to meat, who do not deal specifically with health and envi­ towards meat analogue containing rapeseed protein. Food Control, 123, 107833.
ronmental concerns, the success of hybrid products will depend on two https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2020.107833
major factors. First, future hybrid products should be developed to Barone, A. M., Banovic, M., Asioli, D., Wallace, E., Ruiz-Capillas, C., & Grasso, S. (2021).
The Usual Suspect: How to Co-Create Healthier Meat Products. Food Research
resemble meat products in terms of taste, texture, and flavour, thus
International, 143, 110304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2021.110304
bringing both sides of the coin and fulfilling consumers’ passion for meat BEUC. (2020). One bite at a time: Consumers and the transition to sustainable food,
while promoting more sustainable consumption practices. Efforts from Analysis of a survey of European consumers on attitudes towards sustainable food.
policy makers should be thus made to encourage the consumption of Retrieved from The European Consumer Organisation: Https://www.beuc.eu/pu
blications/beuc-x-2020-042_consumers_and_the_transition_to_sustainable_food.pdf.
hybrid products, raise awareness, familiarity, and support their intro­ Bohrer, B. M. (2017). Nutrient density and nutritional value of meat products and non-
duction as these represent middle ground alternatives to traditional meat foods high in protein. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 65, 103–112.
100% meat or 100% plant-based foods that are perceived tasty (because https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2017.04.016
Breuer, B., Martin, L., Wierig, M., & Saggau, E. (2019). Drivers of change and development
of the meat element), but also sustainable and healthy (because of the in the EU livestock sector – Meta Analysis as basis for future scenario building. Retrieved
plant element). Second, it has to do with communication and labelling of from Federal Office for Agriculture and Food (BLE), Unit 325 –European Research
hybrid products, where first role should be unquestionably taken by the Affairs: https://era-susan.eu/sites/default/files/Drivers%20of%20change%20and%
20development%20in%20the%20EU%20livestock%20sector_BLE_CASA_STUDY_0.
product quality itself and eliciting higher levels of sensory reward (i.e., pdf.
pleasure), while labelling should play only a supporting role. Specif­ Byrne, B. M. (2013). Structural equation modeling with Mplus: Basic concepts, applications,
ically, new hybrid products coming to the market should be easily and programming. routledge.
Cheah, I., Sadat Shimul, A., Liang, J., & Phau, I. (2020). Drivers and barriers toward
perceived as having the same sensory attributes of full meat products by reducing meat consumption. Appetite, 149, 104636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
its overall appearance, which should be supported by suitable market appet.2020.104636
communication, where green and health claims would have only a Circus, V. E., & Robison, R. (2019). Exploring perceptions of sustainable proteins and
meat attachment. British Food Journal, 121(2), 533–545. https://doi.org/10.1108/
supplementary function. Thus, hybrid products positioned as mitigating
BFJ-01-2018-0025
the usual trade-offs between sensory reward and health and/or sus­ De Bakker, E., & Dagevos, H. (2012). Reducing meat consumption in today’s consumer
tainability will be those with the higher market prospects. Even though society: Questioning the citizen-consumer gap. Journal of Agricultural and
many consumers may ignore the above claims, they should still be able Environmental Ethics, 25(6), 877–894. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-011-9345-z
de Boer, J., & Aiking, H. (2020). Favoring plant instead of animal protein sources:
to distinguish them as tasty meat alternatives. Some actors in the food Legitimation by authority, morality, rationality and story logic. Food Quality and
industry have already recognized this tendency and are working on new Preference, 104098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.104098

10
M. Banovic et al. Food Quality and Preference 96 (2022) 104440

de Boer, J., Schösler, H., & Aiking, H. (2014). “Meatless days” or “less but better”? Marty, L., Chambaron, S., Nicklaus, S., & Monnery-Patris, S. (2018). Learned pleasure
Exploring strategies to adapt Western meat consumption to health and sustainability from eating: An opportunity to promote healthy eating in children? Appetite, 120,
challenges. Appetite, 76, 120–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2014.02.002 265–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.09.006
de Boer, J., Schösler, H., & Aiking, H. (2018). Exploring the relative importance of Michaelidou, Nina, & Hassan, Louise M. (2008). The role of health consciousness, food
“Reward” and “Reflection” in food orientations: Relevance for healthier and more safety concern and ethical identity on attitudes and intentions towards organic food.
sustainable diets. Food Quality and Preference, 64, 126–130. https://doi.org/ International Journal of Consumer Studies, 32(2), 163–170. https://doi.org/10.1111/
10.1016/j.foodqual.2017.10.001 ijc.2008.32.issue-210.1111/j.1470-6431.2007.00619.x
De Boer, J., Schösler, H., & Boersema, J. J. (2013). Climate change and meat eating: An Mintel. (2019). Processed Poultry and Red Meat Main Meal Components. Retrieved from
inconvenient couple? Journal of Environmental Psychology, 33, 1–8. https://doi.org/ https://store.mintel.com/uk-processed-poultry-and-red-meat-market-report.
10.1016/j.jenvp.2012.09.001 Myrdal Miller, A., Mills, K., Wong, T., Drescher, G., Lee, S., Sirimuangmoon, C., …
EC. (2020a). Farm to Fork Strategy: For a fair, healthy and environmentally-friendly food Guinard, J. X. (2014). Flavor-enhancing properties of mushrooms in meat-based
system. Retrieved from European Comission: Https://ec.europa.eu/food/sites/food/ dishes in which sodium has been reduced and meat has been partially substituted
files/safety/docs/f2f_action-plan_2020_strategy-info_en.pdf. with mushrooms. Journal of Food Science, 79(9), S1795–S1804. https://doi.org/
EC. (2020b). Special Eurobarometer 505: Making our food fit for the future – Citizens’ 10.1111/1750-3841.12549
expectations. Retrieved from: Https://data.europa.eu/data/datasets/s2241_505_e Neville, Michelle, Tarrega, Amparo, Hewson, Louise, & Foster, Tim (2017). Consumer-
ng?locale=en. orientated development of hybrid beef burger and sausage analogues. Food science &
Elder, Ryan S., & Krishna, Aradhna (2010). The effects of advertising copy on sensory nutrition, 5(4), 852–864. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.2017.5.issue-410.1002/
thoughts and perceived taste. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(5), 748–756. fsn3.466
FAO. (2021). FAOSTAT Online Database. Retrieved March 8, 2021, from http://www. Otto, S., Strenger, M., Maier-Nöth, A., & Schmid, M. (2021). Food Packaging and
fao.org/faostat/en/#data. (Publication no. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data.). Sustainability-Consumer Perception vs. Correlated Scientific Facts: A Review.
Fortune, A. (2019). Danish Crown launches 50/50 concept. Food navigator. Retrieved Journal of Cleaner Production, 126733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
from https://www.foodnavigator.com/Article/2019/08/22/Danish-Crown- jclepro.2021.126733
launches-50-50-concept. Pais, D. F., Marques, A. C., & Fuinhas, J. A. (2020). Reducing Meat Consumption to
Gaskin, J. (2019). Stats Tools Package. Retrieved from http://statwiki.kolobkreations.co Mitigate Climate Change and Promote Health: But Is It Good for the Economy?
m/index.php?title=Main_Page. Environmental Modeling & Assessment, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10666-020-
Gaskin, J., James, M., & Lim, J. (2020). Indirect effects. AMOS plugin, Gaskination’s 09710-0
StatWiki. Retrieved from http://statwiki.gaskination.com/index.php?title=Plugins. Rajagopal, P., & Burnkrant, R. E. (2009). Consumer evaluations of hybrid products.
Godfray, H. C. J., Aveyard, P., Garnett, T., Hall, J. W., Key, T. J., Lorimer, J., … Journal of Consumer Research, 36(2), 232–241. https://doi.org/10.1086/596721
Jebb, S. A. (2018). Meat consumption, health, and the environment. Science, 361 Reipurth, M. F., Hørby, L., Gregersen, C. G., Bonke, A., & Cueto, F. J. P. (2019). Barriers
(6399). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aam5324 and facilitators towards adopting a more plant-based diet in a sample of Danish
Goldstein, Benjamin, Moses, Rebekah, Sammons, Norman, Birkved, Morten, & consumers. Food Quality and Preference, 73, 288–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Kunze, Gotthard (2017). Potential to curb the environmental burdens of American foodqual.2018.10.012
beef consumption using a novel plant-based beef substitute. PloS One, 12(12), Sans, P., & Combris, P. (2015). World meat consumption patterns: An overview of the
e0189029. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189029 last fifty years (1961–2011). Meat Science, 109, 106–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Graça, João, Calheiros, Maria Manuela, & Oliveira, Abílio (2015). Attached to meat?(Un) meatsci.2015.05.012
Willingness and intentions to adopt a more plant-based diet. Appetite, 95, 113–125. Santini, F., Ronzon, T., Perez Dominguez, I., Araujo Enciso, S. R., & Proietti, I. (2017).
Grasso, S., & Jaworska, S. (2020). Part meat and part plant: Are hybrid meat products fad What if meat consumption would decrease more than expected in the high-income
or future? Foods, 9(12), 1888. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9121888 countries? Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, 6(1050–2018-3684), 37–56.
Grasso, S., Rondoni, A., Bari, R., Smith, R., & Mansilla, N. (2021). Effect of information https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.276285
on consumers’ sensory evaluation of beef, plant-based and hybrid beef burgers. Food Sogari, Giovanni, Li, Jie, Wang, Qian, Lefebvre, Michele, Gómez, Miguel I., &
Quality and Preference, 104417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104417 Mora, Cristina (2021). Factors influencing the intention to purchase meat-mushroom
Gregan-Paxton, J., Hoeffler, S., & Zhao, M. (2005). When categorization is ambiguous: blended burgers among college students. Food Quality and Preference, 90, 104169.
Factors that facilitate the use of a multiple category inference strategy. Journal of https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.104169
Consumer Psychology, 15(2), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327663jcp1502_ Southey, F. (Producer). (2021). Why do some ‘hybrid’ products make the cut, while
5 others get the chop? Foodnavigator.com. Retrieved from https://www.foodnavigator.
Guinard, Jean-Xavier, Myrdal Miller, Amy, Mills, Kelly, Wong, Thomas, Lee, Soh Min, com/Article/2021/09/13/Why-do-some-hybrid-products-make-the-cut-while-
Sirimuangmoon, Chirat, … Drescher, Greg (2016). Consumer acceptance of dishes in others-get-the-chop.
which beef has been partially substituted with mushrooms and sodium has been Spencer, M., & Guinard, J. X. (2018). The flexitarian flip™: Testing the modalities of
reduced. Appetite, 105, 449–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.06.018 flavor as sensory strategies to accomplish the shift from meat-centered to vegetable-
Hoek, A. C., Luning, P. A., Stafleu, A., & de Graaf, C. (2004). Food-related lifestyle and forward mixed dishes. Journal of Food Science, 83(1), 175–187. https://doi.org/
health attitudes of Dutch vegetarians, non-vegetarian consumers of meat substitutes, 10.1111/1750-3841.13991
and meat consumers. Appetite, 42(3), 265–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Spencer, M., Kurzer, A., Cienfuegos, C., & Guinard, J.-X. (2018). Student consumer
appet.2003.12.003 acceptance of plant-forward burrito bowls in which two-thirds of the meat has been
Hu, L.t., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure replaced with legumes and vegetables: The Flexitarian Flip™ in university dining
analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: venues. Appetite, 131, 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2018.08.030
A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/ Spencer, Molly, Rowe, Steven, Bonnell, Carrie, & Dalton, Pamela (2021). Consumer
10705519909540118 acceptance of plant-forward recipes in a natural consumption setting. Food Quality
ICC, ESOMAR,. (2016). ICC/ESOMAR: International Code on Market, Opinion and Social and Preference, 88, 104080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.104080
Research and Data Analytics. Retrieved from https://www.esomar.org. Steenkamp, Jan-Benedict E. M., & Baumgartner, Hans (1998). Assessing measurement
Kees, J., Burton, S., & Tangari, A. H. (2010). The impact of regulatory focus, temporal invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1),
orientation, and fit on consumer responses to health-related advertising. Retrieved 78–107.
from Journal of Advertising, 39(1), 19–34 https://www.jstor.org/stable/20720453. Tarrega, A., Rizo, A., Murciano, A., Laguna, L., & Fiszman, S. (2020). Are mixed meat and
Lang, Mark (2020). Consumer acceptance of blending plant-based ingredients into vegetable protein products good alternatives for reducing meat consumption? A case
traditional meat-based foods: Evidence from the meat-mushroom blend. Food Quality study with burgers. Current Research in Food Science, 3, 30–40. https://doi.org/
and Preference, 79, 103758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.103758 10.1016/j.crfs.2020.02.003
Lemken, D., Spiller, A., & Schulze-Ehlers, B. (2019). More room for legume–Consumer Tucker, C. A. (2014). The significance of sensory appeal for reduced meat consumption.
acceptance of meat substitution with classic, processed and meat-resembling legume Appetite, 81, 168–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2014.06.022
products. Appetite, 143, 104412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.104412 Van der Werff, E., Steg, L., & Keizer, K. (2013). The value of environmental self-identity:
Macdiarmid, Jennie I., Cerroni, Simone, Kalentakis, Dimitrios, & Reynolds, Christian The relationship between biospheric values, environmental self-identity and
(2021). How important is healthiness, carbon footprint and meat content when environmental preferences, intentions and behaviour. Journal of Environmental
purchasing a ready meal? Evidence from a non-hypothetical discrete choice Psychology, 34, 55–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2012.12.006
experiment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 282, 124510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Watson, E. (2020). Hybrid milk? DFA rolls out Dairy+ Milk Blends combining plant-
jclepro.2020.124510 based and dairy milk to Northeast. Food-navigator. Retrieved from https://www.
foodnavigator-usa.com/Article/2020/10/31/Hybrid-milk-DFA-rolls-out-Dairy-Milk-
Blends-combining-plant-based-and-dairy-milk-to-Northeast.

11