Predicting satisfaction in meals and snacks

Consumers' attitudes towards alternatives to conventional meat products: Expectations about taste and satisfaction, and the role of disgust

The livestock sector has environmental, health, and animal welfare impacts. This UK-based, quantitative study aimed to elucidate consumers' valuation of alternatives to conventional meat products. In an online study, 151 meat eaters and 44 non-meat eaters were shown pictures of meat, dairy, and bakery products, including beef burger, cheese sandwich and blueberry muffin. Each product was evaluated with three different labels (e.g., 'conventional', 'plant-based' and 'cultured' for beef burger). Participants rated expected taste pleasantness, fullness, satisfaction, healthiness, disgust and willingness-to-pay for each product/label combination. The results obtained demonstrate that alternatives to conventional meat products overall are acceptable to both meat and non-meat eaters. Although meat eaters' expected plant-based meat alternatives to be less satisfying, due to lower expected taste pleasantness and fillingness (Cohen's d = 0.14 to 0.63), they perceived the plant-based alternatives to be more healthy (d ≥ 1.18). Cultured meat products were perceived by meat eaters to be equally or more healthy, but more disgusting (d ≥ 0.41), than conventional meat products. These results suggest there is an opportunity to promote (motivate) acceptance of alternatives to conventional meat products based on their perceived healthiness, to at least partly balance reduced expected taste pleasantness and other negative attributes (i.e., barriers).

Identifying Barriers to Reducing Portion Size: A Qualitative Focus Group Study of British Men and Women

Reducing portion size might reduce meal satisfaction, which could minimize adherence to portion size interventions. The present study sought to identify the perceived barriers for consumers to eat smaller portions. A secondary aim explored the relative contribution of enjoyment of taste and post-meal fullness as determinants of meal satisfaction. Focus groups (N = 42) evaluated consumers' feelings toward a small reduction in portion size. Thematic analysis of written free association tasks and open-ended group discussions revealed that most participants expected to feel hungry and unsatisfied, which motivated them to consume something else. However, others expected to feel comfortable, healthy, and virtuous. The acceptability of the reduced portion was also determined by meal characteristics (e.g., time and setting) and individual characteristics (e.g., predicted energy requirements). Compared to post-meal fullness, enjoyment of taste was perceived to be the more important determinant of meal satisfaction. In conclusion, interventions should present portion reduction as a marginal modification with little physiological consequence to energy reserves, while emphasizing the positive feelings (e.g., comfort, satisfaction, and self-worth) experienced after consuming a smaller portion. Additionally, focusing on taste enjoyment (rather than fullness) might be a useful strategy to maintain meal satisfaction despite a reduction in meal size.

Food portion size influences accompanying beverage selection in adults

When trying to reduce food portion size, it is important that meal satisfaction is, as far as possible, preserved. Otherwise, individuals may select accompaniments to the meal (e.g., snacks, beverages) to achieve satisfaction and, in doing so, negate any benefit of the original portion size reduction. This study investigated whether varying portion sizes of food would influence choice of accompanying beverages. That is, when presented with a food portion size that is smaller or larger than their ideal, an individual may compensate by choosing a beverage based on its satiating and/or orosensory properties to balance the expected satiation and satisfaction of a meal. Data from an online interactive study (n = 93) was analysed using multilevel ordinal logistic regression models. Food portion size (100, 300, 500, 700, or 900 kcal) predicted beverage choice (water, low-energy sweetened beverage, high-energy sweetened beverage). For example, the sweetened beverages were more likely to be selected with small food portion sizes (p < .001). Participant ideal food portion size did not interact with this relationship. Participants appear to have recognised that sweetened beverages provide flavour and/or energy, and used them to compensate for a smaller meal. While switching to a low-energy beverage with an increased food portion size is advantageous for energy balance, choosing a high-energy beverage with a decreased food portion size is likely to be detrimental for those attempting to reduce energy intake and body weight.