The Impact of Framing on Acceptance of Cultured Meat
Cultured meat can be produced from growing animal cells in-vitro rather than as part of a living animal. This technology has the potential to address several of the major ethical, environmental, and public health concerns associated with conventional meat production. However, research has highlighte...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2019-07-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Nutrition |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnut.2019.00103/full |
| _version_ | 1818683801891504128 |
|---|---|
| author | Christopher Bryant Courtney Dillard |
| author_facet | Christopher Bryant Courtney Dillard |
| author_sort | Christopher Bryant |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Cultured meat can be produced from growing animal cells in-vitro rather than as part of a living animal. This technology has the potential to address several of the major ethical, environmental, and public health concerns associated with conventional meat production. However, research has highlighted some consumer uncertainty regarding the concept. Although several studies have examined the media coverage of this new food technology, research linking different frames to differences in consumer attitudes is lacking. In an experimental study, we expose U.S. adults (n = 480) to one of three different frames on cultured meat: “societal benefits,” “high tech,” and “same meat.” We demonstrate that those who encounter cultured meat through the “high tech” frame have significantly more negative attitudes toward the concept, and are significantly less likely to consume it. Worryingly, this has been a very dominant frame in early media coverage of cultured meat. Whilst this is arguably inevitable, since its technologically advanced nature is what makes it newsworthy, we argue that this high tech framing may be causing consumers to develop more negative attitudes toward cultured meat than they otherwise might. Implications for producers and researchers are discussed. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-17T10:40:31Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-e207df699a6f4bd585b5b0f622087085 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2296-861X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-17T10:40:31Z |
| publishDate | 2019-07-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Nutrition |
| spelling | doaj.art-e207df699a6f4bd585b5b0f6220870852022-12-21T21:52:17ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Nutrition2296-861X2019-07-01610.3389/fnut.2019.00103464060The Impact of Framing on Acceptance of Cultured MeatChristopher Bryant0Courtney Dillard1Department of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, United KingdomUniversity Studies, Portland State University, Portland, OR, United StatesCultured meat can be produced from growing animal cells in-vitro rather than as part of a living animal. This technology has the potential to address several of the major ethical, environmental, and public health concerns associated with conventional meat production. However, research has highlighted some consumer uncertainty regarding the concept. Although several studies have examined the media coverage of this new food technology, research linking different frames to differences in consumer attitudes is lacking. In an experimental study, we expose U.S. adults (n = 480) to one of three different frames on cultured meat: “societal benefits,” “high tech,” and “same meat.” We demonstrate that those who encounter cultured meat through the “high tech” frame have significantly more negative attitudes toward the concept, and are significantly less likely to consume it. Worryingly, this has been a very dominant frame in early media coverage of cultured meat. Whilst this is arguably inevitable, since its technologically advanced nature is what makes it newsworthy, we argue that this high tech framing may be causing consumers to develop more negative attitudes toward cultured meat than they otherwise might. Implications for producers and researchers are discussed.https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnut.2019.00103/fullclean meatcultured meatcell-based meatconsumer psychologyframing |
| spellingShingle | Christopher Bryant Courtney Dillard The Impact of Framing on Acceptance of Cultured Meat Frontiers in Nutrition clean meat cultured meat cell-based meat consumer psychology framing |
| title | The Impact of Framing on Acceptance of Cultured Meat |
| title_full | The Impact of Framing on Acceptance of Cultured Meat |
| title_fullStr | The Impact of Framing on Acceptance of Cultured Meat |
| title_full_unstemmed | The Impact of Framing on Acceptance of Cultured Meat |
| title_short | The Impact of Framing on Acceptance of Cultured Meat |
| title_sort | impact of framing on acceptance of cultured meat |
| topic | clean meat cultured meat cell-based meat consumer psychology framing |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnut.2019.00103/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT christopherbryant theimpactofframingonacceptanceofculturedmeat AT courtneydillard theimpactofframingonacceptanceofculturedmeat AT christopherbryant impactofframingonacceptanceofculturedmeat AT courtneydillard impactofframingonacceptanceofculturedmeat |