When Evolution Works Against the Future: Disgust's Contributions to the Acceptance of New Food Technologies
- PMID: 30759314
- PMCID: PMC6850642
- DOI: 10.1111/risa.13279
When Evolution Works Against the Future: Disgust's Contributions to the Acceptance of New Food Technologies
Abstract
New food technologies have a high potential to transform the current resource-consuming food system to a more efficient and sustainable one, but public acceptance of new food technologies is rather low. Such an avoidance might be maintained by a deeply preserved risk avoidance system called disgust. In an online survey, participants (N = 313) received information about a variety of new food technology applications (i.e., genetically modified meat/fish, edible nanotechnology coating film, nanotechnology food box, artificial meat/milk, and a synthetic food additive). Every new food technology application was rated according to the respondent's willingness to eat (WTE) it (i.e., acceptance), risk, benefit, and disgust perceptions. Furthermore, food disgust sensitivity was measured using the Food Disgust Scale. Overall, the WTE both gene-technology applications and meat coated with an edible nanotechnology film were low and disgust responses toward all three applications were high. In full mediation models, food disgust sensitivity predicted the disgust response toward each new food technology application, which in turn influenced WTE them. Effects of disgust responses on the WTE a synthetic food additive were highest for and lowest for the edible nanotechnology coating film compared to the other technologies. Results indicate that direct disgust responses influence acceptance and risk and benefit perceptions of new food technologies. Beyond the discussion of this study, implications for future research and strategies to increase acceptance of new food technologies are discussed.
Keywords: Acceptance; benefit perception; disgust; new food technologies; risk perception.
© 2019 The Authors Risk Analysis published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society for Risk Analysis.
Figures

Similar articles
-
Consumer acceptance of novel food technologies.Nat Food. 2020 Jun;1(6):343-350. doi: 10.1038/s43016-020-0094-x. Epub 2020 Jun 17. Nat Food. 2020. PMID: 37128090 Review.
-
Public acceptance of nanotechnology foods and food packaging: the influence of affect and trust.Appetite. 2007 Sep;49(2):459-66. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2007.03.002. Epub 2007 Mar 14. Appetite. 2007. PMID: 17442455
-
Perceived naturalness and evoked disgust influence acceptance of cultured meat.Meat Sci. 2018 May;139:213-219. doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2018.02.007. Epub 2018 Feb 7. Meat Sci. 2018. PMID: 29459297
-
Perceived naturalness, disgust, trust and food neophobia as predictors of cultured meat acceptance in ten countries.Appetite. 2020 Dec 1;155:104814. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2020.104814. Epub 2020 Aug 9. Appetite. 2020. PMID: 32783971
-
No Way, That's Gross! How Public Exposure Therapy Can Overcome Disgust Preventing Consumer Adoption of Sustainable Food Alternatives.Foods. 2021 Jun 15;10(6):1380. doi: 10.3390/foods10061380. Foods. 2021. PMID: 34203678 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Developing Food Consumer Attitudes towards Ionizing Radiation and Genetic Modification.Nutrients. 2024 Oct 10;16(20):3427. doi: 10.3390/nu16203427. Nutrients. 2024. PMID: 39458425 Free PMC article.
-
Consumer acceptance of novel food technologies.Nat Food. 2020 Jun;1(6):343-350. doi: 10.1038/s43016-020-0094-x. Epub 2020 Jun 17. Nat Food. 2020. PMID: 37128090 Review.
-
The lasting effect of the Romantic view of nature: How it influences perceptions of risk and the support of symbolic actions against climate change.Risk Anal. 2025 Jun;45(6):1399-1409. doi: 10.1111/risa.17672. Epub 2024 Nov 3. Risk Anal. 2025. PMID: 39489625 Free PMC article.
-
The Double Bind of Communicating About Zoonotic Origins: Describing Exotic Animal Sources of COVID-19 Increases Both Healthy and Discriminatory Avoidance Intentions.Risk Anal. 2022 Mar;42(3):506-521. doi: 10.1111/risa.13764. Epub 2021 Jun 2. Risk Anal. 2022. PMID: 34076291 Free PMC article.
-
Consumer Awareness, Perceptions and Avoidance of Ultra-Processed Foods: A Study of UK Adults in 2024.Foods. 2024 Jul 23;13(15):2317. doi: 10.3390/foods13152317. Foods. 2024. PMID: 39123509 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Al‐Shawaf, L. , & Lewis, D. M. G. (2013). Exposed intestines and contaminated cooks: Sex, stress, and satiation predict disgust sensitivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(6), 698–702.
-
- Al‐Shawaf, L. , Lewis, D. M. G. , Alley, T. R. , & Buss, D. M. (2015). Mating strategy, disgust, and food neophobia. Appetite, 85, 30–35. - PubMed
-
- Alhakami, A. , & Slovic, P. (1994). A psychological study of the inverse relationships between perceived risk and perceived benefit. Risk Analysis, 14(6), 1085–1096. - PubMed
-
- Ammann, J. , Hartmann, C. , & Siegrist, M. (2018a). Development and validation of the Food Disgust Picture Scale. Appetite, 125, 367–379. - PubMed
-
- Ammann, J. , Hartmann, C. , & Siegrist, M. (2018b). Does food disgust sensitivity influence eating behaviour? Experimental validation of the Food Disgust Scale. Food Quality and Preference, 68, 411–414.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources