Background: the last decade has witnessed an explosion of new consumer behaviour research technology, and new methods are published almost monthly. To what extent are these methods applicable in the specific area of food consumer science, and if they are, are they any good? Methods: in this paper, we attempt to give an overview of the developments in this area. We distinguish between (‘input’) methods needed to shape the measurement context a consumer is brought in, e.g., by means of ‘immersive’ methods, and (‘output’) methods that perform measurements proper. Concerning the latter, we distinguish between methods focusing on neuro-science, on psychology, and on behaviour. In addition, we suggest a way to assess the validity of the methods, based on psychological theory, concerning biases resulting from consumer awareness of a measurement situation. The methods are evaluated on three summarising validity criteria; conclusions: the conclusion is that behavioural measures generally appear more valid than psychological or neuro-scientific methods. The main conclusion is that validity of a method should never be taken for granted, and it should be always be assessed in the context of the research question.

The primary goal of this study is to be able to discern specific types of consumers in terms of their psychosocial characteristics who may need different ways of receiving dietary advice. Knowing these types will enable a better fit of advice to consumers’ psychosocial characteristics, hereby stimulating healthy eating as the probability of compliance to the advice can potentially increase. The study draws upon several psychological theories to distinguish unique underlying factors that can subsequently be used to personalize nutrition information for consumers. A number of general psychological scales (self-regulation, action and coping self-efficacy, social comparison, intrinsic motivation, health info processing, need for cognition and for affect, and regulatory focus) are filled out by 988 respondents, including their preferences for receiving personalized forms of nutrition advice. The set of joint items from various psychological constructs is analyzed using a Principal Component Analysis to find underlying psychological characteristics. The PCA produces four components (explaining 51% of variation), that could be interpreted as ‘intrinsic interest and capabilities for healthy eating,’ ‘perceived difficulty to eat healthily,’ ‘self-worth insecurity,’ and ‘seeking positive challenges,’ respectively. By means of a Logistic Regression these components are able to predict preferences for different forms of receiving nutrition advice. This first component shows that a mind set for maintaining a healthy diet goes together with an interest in receiving an advice on what do to and on how that will affect one’s health. The second component predicts a preference for a fixed moment to receive information/advice. This may be a strategy of those that perceive difficulties to eat healthily, to help them control their healthy food intake. The insecurity that the third component models seems to lead to a wish for receiving specific advice about their health situation at fixed moments in time. The fourth component is a small component, therefore its prediction of a wish for an advice focussing on prevention of negative consequences is probably not a strong result. The study does point out that there appear different psychosocial types of consumers, that may benefit by being addressed according to their preference for receiving nutrition advice on specific moments, of a specific level of detail or pointing at the type of consequences the advice has. A better fit of the advice to the psychosocial characteristics of the recipient, captured in the identified components in the current study, may lead to an increase in compliance, although that will have to be further investigated in subsequent work.

Plant-based meat substitutes replacing animal meat can potentially support the transition towards more sustainable diets. To enable the required transition, consumer acceptance of plant-based meat is essential. An important aspect of this is the feeling of satiety or being full after eating. This study determined the satiating capacity of both plant-based meat and animal meat in 60 adults under real-life in-home conditions. Participants consumed four fixed ready-to eat meals for lunch at home once per week. Two types of Indian curry with ‘chicken’ were investigated as well as two types of pasta Bolognese with ‘minced meat’. The two ‘chicken’ dishes and the two ‘minced meat’ dishes had the same recipe except for a gram-for-gram swap (125 g each) of either animal meat (chicken breast and minced meat) or plant-based (soy) meat. Results showed no difference in the satiating power of an animal meat dish and a plant-based meat dish when these were eaten as part of a full lunch meal at home. In addition, the meals did not result in energy nor macronutrient compensation during the rest of the day after consuming the meals. This occurred despite the caloric differences of the meals as a result of the real-life conditions (i.e., a lower energy content of the pasta with plant-based meat compared to the other meals). We conclude that meals with plant-based meat can be as satiating as meals with animal meat.