IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i24p16879-d1300920.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding Consumer Attitudes toward Cultured Meat: The Role of Online Media Framing

Author

Listed:
  • Béré Benjamin Kouarfaté

    (Marketing Department, School of Management Sciences, University of Quebec at Montreal (ESG UQAM), Montreal, QC H2X 3X2, Canada)

  • Fabien Durif

    (Marketing Department, School of Management Sciences, University of Quebec at Montreal (ESG UQAM), Montreal, QC H2X 3X2, Canada)

Abstract

The widespread commercialization of cultured meat, produced from animal stem cells grown in vitro, faces significant challenges related to technical, regulatory, and social acceptability constraints. Despite advancements in knowledge, the acceptance of this innovation remains uncertain. Understanding individuals’ decision-making processes and interpretative patterns is crucial, with media framing playing a key role in shaping attitudes toward cultured meat adoption. This research, focusing on Twitter as a social media platform, examines the impact of media framing on consumer attitudes (cognitive, affective, and conative) regarding cultured meat. Qualitative (content analysis) and quantitative (MANOVA) analyses were conducted on 23,020 posts and 38,531 comments, selected based on media framing or containing relevant attitude components. This study reveals that media-framed posts significantly influence consumer attitudes compared to non-media-framed posts. While different types of media framing (ethical, intrinsic, informational, and belief) exhibit varying impacts on attitude components, posts combining ethical, intrinsic, and informational frames have a more substantial effect on cultured meat acceptability. The belief frame, particularly for the behavioral component, is equally influential. Consumer attitudes toward cultured meat are found to be ambivalent, considering the associated benefits and risks. Nevertheless, the affective component of attitude is notably influenced by posts featuring informational and ethical media frames. This study suggests implications for authorities and businesses, emphasizing the importance of differentiated education and marketing strategies. Advertising messages that combine ethical, intrinsic, and informational frames are recommended. Additionally, this study advocates for regulatory measures governing the production, marketing, and consumption of cultured meat to instill consumer confidence in the industry. By highlighting the significance of beliefs in cultured meat consumption behavior, this research points toward potential exploration of cultural and religious influences in future studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Béré Benjamin Kouarfaté & Fabien Durif, 2023. "Understanding Consumer Attitudes toward Cultured Meat: The Role of Online Media Framing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-28, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:24:p:16879-:d:1300920
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/24/16879/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/24/16879/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Matthew J. Hornsey & Emily A. Harris & Kelly S. Fielding, 2018. "Relationships among conspiratorial beliefs, conservatism and climate scepticism across nations," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(7), pages 614-620, July.
    2. Ortega, David L. & Sun, Jiayu & Lin, Wen, 2022. "Identity labels as an instrument to reduce meat demand and encourage consumption of meat alternatives in China," 2024 Annual Meeting, July 28-30, New Orleans, LA 322089, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bhagyashree, Katare & Yenerall, Jacqueline & Zhao, Shuoli & Wang, Xuejian, 2024. "Novel approaches to analyze consumer behavior and policies to promote healthy and sustainable consumption," IAAE 2024 Conference, August 2-7, 2024, New Delhi, India 344348, International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sunil P. Dhoubhadel & William Ridley, 2025. "China's meat sector growth and U.S. grain and oilseed exports," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(1), pages 275-303, March.
    2. Heinz Welsch, 2022. "Correction to: What shapes cognitions of climate change in Europe? Ideology, morality, and the role of educational attainment," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 12(2), pages 396-397, June.
    3. Carlsson, Fredrik & Kataria, Mitesh & Krupnick, Alan & Lampi, Elina & Löfgren, Åsa & Qin, Ping & Sterner, Thomas & Yang, Xiaojun, 2021. "The climate decade: Changing attitudes on three continents," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    4. Ertör-Akyazi, Pinar & Akçay, Çağlar, 2021. "Moral intuitions predict pro-social behaviour in a climate commons game," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    5. Ulf J. J. Hahnel & Christian Mumenthaler & Tobia Spampatti & Tobias Brosch, 2020. "Ideology as Filter: Motivated Information Processing and Decision-Making in the Energy Domain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-19, October.
    6. Mike Farjam & Olexandr Nikolaychuk & Giangiacomo Bravo, 2019. "Investing into climate change mitigation despite the risk of failure," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 154(3), pages 453-460, June.
    7. Peter Andre & Teodora Boneva & Felix Chopra & Armin Falk, 2021. "Misperceived Social Norms and Willingness to Act Against Climate Change," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 101, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    8. Kirsti M. Jylhä & Pontus Strimling & Jens Rydgren, 2020. "Climate Change Denial among Radical Right-Wing Supporters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-15, December.
    9. repec:osf:osfxxx:pkeb8_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Kevin Winter & Matthew J. Hornsey & Lotte Pummerer & Kai Sassenberg, 2022. "Anticipating and defusing the role of conspiracy beliefs in shaping opposition to wind farms," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 7(12), pages 1200-1207, December.
    11. Adriana AnaMaria Davidescu & Simona-Andreea Apostu & Andreea Paul, 2020. "Exploring Citizens’ Actions in Mitigating Climate Change and Moving toward Urban Circular Economy. A Multilevel Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-46, September.
    12. Anthony Snider & Shanhong Luo & Theresa Schell & Jeffery Hill, 2021. "Comparing Environmental Attitudes and Behaviors between an Indigenous and a Non-indigenous Sample from New Zealand and the United States of America," Environmental Management and Sustainable Development, Macrothink Institute, vol. 10(1), pages 1-23, February.
    13. Malcolm Fairbrother, 2022. "Public opinion about climate policies: A review and call for more studies of what people want," PLOS Climate, Public Library of Science, vol. 1(5), pages 1-14, May.
    14. O'Shaughnessy, Matthew & Schiff, Daniel & Varshney, Lav R. & Rozell, Christopher & Davenport, Mark, 2021. "What governs attitudes toward artificial intelligence adoption and governance?," OSF Preprints pkeb8, Center for Open Science.
    15. Ulf J. J. Hahnel & Christian Mumenthaler & Tobias Brosch, 2020. "Emotional foundations of the public climate change divide," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 161(1), pages 9-19, July.
    16. Rao Yuan & Shaosheng Jin & Lin Zhou & Hsiaoping Chien & Wenchao Wu, 2025. "Promoting eco‐labeled food consumption in China: The role of information," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(2), pages 401-423, April.
    17. Farjam, Mike & Nikolaychuk, Olexandr & Bravo, Giangiacomo, 2019. "Experimental evidence of an environmental attitude-behavior gap in high-cost situations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.
    18. Sverker C. Jagers & Erick Lachapelle & Johan Martinsson & Simon Matti, 2021. "Bridging the ideological gap? How fairness perceptions mediate the effect of revenue recycling on public support for carbon taxes in the United States, Canada and Germany," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(5), pages 529-554, September.
    19. Yeheng Pan & Yu Xie & Hepeng Jia & Xi Luo, 2022. "Ideologies, Conspiracy Beliefs, and the Chinese Public’s Politicized Attitudes to Climate Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14, December.
    20. Tiffany H. Morrison & W. Neil Adger & Arun Agrawal & Katrina Brown & Matthew J. Hornsey & Terry P. Hughes & Meha Jain & Maria Carmen Lemos & Lucy Holmes McHugh & Saffron O’Neill & Derek Berkel, 2022. "Radical interventions for climate-impacted systems," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 12(12), pages 1100-1106, December.
    21. Qi, Ye & Lu, Jiaqi & Liu, Tianle, 2024. "Measuring energy transition away from fossil fuels: A new index," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:24:p:16879-:d:1300920. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.