Insects As Food: Perception and Acceptance

Home , Insects as food

Copyright! Reproduction and dissemination – also partial – applicable to all media only with Science & Research | Overview written permission of Umschau Zeitschriftenverlag GmbH, Wiesbaden.

Peer-reviewed | Manuscript received: August 03, 2016 | Revision accepted: October 17, 2016

Insects as food: perception and acceptance

Findings from current research Christina Hartmann, Michael Siegrist

favorable n-3/n-6-fatty acid ratio Abstract [3–5]. Another advantage of insects is that their production is compa- The global demand for animal protein will continue to increase in the coming ratively environmentally-friendly. years. In order to meet this growing demand and to move towards sustainable A recently published comparison of nutrition, insects appear to be a good alternative to traditionally produced ani- the environmental impact of different mal protein. The acceptance of insects as an alternative protein source is still low meat alternatives demonstrated that among Western consumers. This systematic literature review reveals the extent to insect and soya flour based alternatives which people are willing to eat insects in Europe, as well as which influencial fac- have the lowest environmental impact, tors have already been examined and which strategies to increase acceptance are that milk and gluten-based alternatives promising. Further research is required to better understand how insects could have a moderate impact and that cul- be made more attractive to the Western market. However, it remains to be seen tured meat or myco-, i.e. mushroom whether insects will find a place in the diet of Western consumers. based, analogues (e.g. QuornTM) have Keywords: consumers, insects, willingness to eat, disgust, food neophobia, ento- the highest impact [6]. mophagy Approx. 2,000 species of edible insects have been identified globally to date [7]. In many cultural spheres, e.g. in East Asia, Africa and South Introduction rest in insects as an alternative pro- America, they are harvested from tein source has increased. the wild and are part of the tradi- The production of animal protein is Insects can be a source of high-qua- tional diet [1]. In contrast, in Wes- linked to high resource consump- lity protein (i.e. source of essential tern countries they tend to trigger tion, requiring a lot of agricultural amino acids, vitamins and mi- disgust rather than a desire to eat. land, water and energy. Traditional nerals) depending on the species, The present article gives an over- livestock farming and meat produc- stage of development and diet [2]. view of the current data available tion are also morally questionable. In comparison to some meat pro- on the subject of the perception and Interest in alternative protein sour- ducts they also have lower concen- acceptance of insects as food from a ces which can be produced using trations of cholesterol alongside a consumer perspective. fewer resources has rapidly increased in recent years. Due to a report by the FAO [1] and the commitment of individual scientists, public inte- Food neophobia denotes the tendency to reject food which deviates from the cultural norm or which is unknown. This can be stronger or weaker among individuals. Repeated contact with a food can reduce the rejection of new food, as familiarity is created (mere exposure effect).

Citation: Entomophagy describes the consumption of insects. This practice is Hartmann C, Siegrist M (2017) rarely found in western cultures. Insects as food: Perception Qualitative studies: Qualitative social research includes e.g. focus and acceptance. Findings from groups and group discussions, the core concept being that the studied current research. Ernahrungs group can report their subjective perspectives in their own words. Umschau 64(3): 44–50 Quantitative studies often serve to examine pre-determined hypo- theses. Studies are performed e.g. as experiments or surveys. Measu- This article is available online: rements of test persons are taken and statistical correlations between DOI: 10.4455/eu.2017.010 pre-determined indicators are examined.

44 Ernaehrungs Umschau international | 3/2017 Copyright! Reproduction and dissemination – also partial – applicable to all media only with written permission of Umschau Zeitschriftenverlag GmbH, Wiesbaden. ©stask/iStock/Thinkstock

Fig. 1: Fried silkworms

Methodology There were no restrictions as to pu- literature review due to their quali- blication date. tative study design. The studies detailed in the following A total of 16 relevant articles were literature review are part of a com- identified (• Table 1). The majority prehensive systematic review on of these studies was based on on- Results the subject of sustainable protein line surveys. Three experiments and consumption [8]. A literature search four hedonic sensory tests were also Willingness to eat insects was carried out in January 2016 carried out. The search listed further Various consumer surveys in Eu- using the Web of Science database studies on this subject by Tan et al. rope indicate that the willingness to (core collection) and a set of pre-de- [9], Balzan et al. [10] and House consume insects as a meat substi- fined keywords. The search string [11]; these were not included in this tute is very low. In a Belgian study was: ([“meat substitute” or “alternative protein” or “cultured meat”] or [sustainab* and (meat or milk* or cheese* or egg*)] and [consum* low nutritional value high nutritional value or behav* or food choice]). Studies Germany which were found in lists of references in relevant articles were also primitive civilized included. The review looked exclu- China sively at quantitative studies published in English-speaking journals disgusting tasty with peer review processes. Another prerequisite was that the study examined consumer acceptance of exotic familiar alternatives to traditional meat-based proteins. Further search crite- ria were: consumer awareness of the environmental effects of meat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 production, willingness to reduce response scale meat consumption, willingness to eat cultured meat and plant-based Abb. 2: Fried silkworms as food (adjusted according to [13]) meat substitute products and the Comparison of the semantic differential of fried silkworms in Germany (N = 502) and China acceptance of insects as food. This (N = 443). This method helps to reveal the image which respondents have of fried silkworms in different cultural spheres. Participants indicated their perception of silkworms on article focuses solely on studies on a response scale of 1 to 10 (x-axis), wherein the ends of the response scale consisted of two the subject of insect consumption. contrasting terms.

Ernaehrungs Umschau international | 3/2017 45 Copyright! Reproduction and dissemination – also partial – applicable to all media only with Science & Research | Overview written permission of Umschau Zeitschriftenverlag GmbH, Wiesbaden.

Authors, year Study type (number of test persons) Insect product Question Key findings Caparros Megido et al., 2014 [24] tasting in Belgium with visitors at an insectarium mealworms and crickets combined with different spices acceptance measured by unstructured • > 70% of all study participants tasted all preparations; mealworms baked with chocolate, (N = 189) and sauces hedonic test pepper or ‘natural’ were rated most positively • after tasting, the majority of over 25s said they would be prepared to eat or cook insects in future Caparros Megido et al., 2016 [32] tasting in Belgium with students (N = 79) hybrid burgers made from mealworms, acceptance measured by hedonic test; • appearance, taste and smell of beef burgers were better rated than those of the mealworm/beef combination mealworm/beef and mealworm/lentil combinations comparison of different products and the mealworm/lentil combination as well as the lentil-only patty • men rated the insect hybrid burger more positively than women De Boer et al., 2013 [14] online survey in the Netherlands (N = 1,083) snack made from crickets participants chose between a snack made • 4% chose the insect snack from crickets and other meat-free alterna- • no influence of gender, educational background, age or number of meat days/week tives (e.g. seaweed, beans) Gmuer et al., 2016 [21] online survey in Switzerland (N = 428) tortilla chips combined with crickets, emotions triggered by the idea of eating • crickets alone and a mix of unprocessed crickets and chips triggered the most negative emotion profile varying in degree of processing the products and willingness to eat (e.g. irritated, disgusted, uneasy, strange) • emotion profile was associated with a willingness to eat Hartmann et al., 2015 [13] online survey in Germany (N = 502) products from processed insects (e.g. insect flour cookies) willingness to eat different products and • lowest willingness to eat for unprocessed insects, highest willingness to eat for processed insects; and China (N = 443) and unprocessed insects (e.g. fried silkworms) cross-cultural differences this difference in the degree of processing was irrelevant in the Chinese sample • higher willingness to eat if already had experience in eating insects and low food-neophobic tendencies • no gender differences Hartmann & Siegrist, 2016 [25] experiment in Switzerland (N = 104) insect chips (tortilla crisps with crickets flour); willingness to eat unprocessed insects • significant influence of experimental manipulation, when controlled for covariates unprocessed insects (fried silkworms and crickets) after test persons had eaten either insect • willingness to eat was associated with food neophobia, having eaten insects already in the past, chips (experimental group) or regular disgust sensitivity in relation to animal food contamination tortilla chips (control group) • positive eating experience with product from processed insects increases willingness to eat unprocessed insects Lensvelt & Steenbekkers, 2014 [26] survey and tasting in Australia (N = 75) and the insects (general), roasted crickets, attitude towards entomophagy • 38% did not eat the insect products Netherlands (N = 134) biscuit made from insect flour • only survey respondents with a neutral attitude to entomophagy tasted the products • attitude towards entomophagy more positive after tasting

Looy & Wood, 2006 [27] experiment with Canadian students (N = 234) photos and videos on entomophagy and insect tasting effect of providing information on the • disgust was named by 75% before information provision and by 47% after info provision initial reaction of participants to the idea • 56% of participants in the control group stated that probably the most effective way to change attitude of eating insects was to taste insects (“bug banquets”) Ruby et al., 2015 [17]* online survey in the USA (N = 220) and India products made from processed and factors associated with willingness to eat • 65% of women and 78% of men in the USA would eat a product made from processed insects (N = 179) unprocessed insects of different species and cross-cultural differences • willingness to eat processed insects > willingness to eat unprocessed insects; USA > India; men > women • perceived environmental advantages, “sensation seeking” and male gender were positive predictors; disgust sensitivity and food neophobia were negative predictors Schosler et al., 2012 [15] online survey in the Netherlands, same sample menus with insects as meat substitutes attractiveness of menus and probability • pizza with non-visible insect proteins received the best rating; salad with fried mealworms was rated worst as in De Boer et al., 2013 [14] that they would prepare these dishes • low probability of preparing dishes oneself themselves • menus with visible insects were more positively rated by men than by women Schouteten et al., 2016 [28] tasting experiment in Belgium (N = 97) burger patty made from mealworms taste evaluation of an insect burger in • 10% did not eat the insect burger in the non-blind test; plant and insect based burgers were more negatively rated in terms (available to purchase in Belgium) comparison to plant and meat-based bur- of taste than meat-based burgers gers in a blind test and in a non-blind test • sensory quality of insect burgers has potential for improvement • information communication about contents positively influenced evaluation of insect burger Tan et al., 2016 [33] tasting in the Netherlands (N = 103) burger patty made from mealworms sensory evaluation of burger patties • willingness to eat was strongly influenced by perceived low (cultural) appropriateness of ingredients labelled with the contents meat, lamb • negative taste expectations because of unusual ingredients were not associated with reduced taste evaluation after tasting brain, frog or mealworm (contents only • even if sensory evaluation was positive, this did not lead to an increase in acceptance of the unusual ingredients fictional) Tan et al., 2016 [16] online survey in the Netherlands (N = 976) preparations made from mealworms varying in flavor influence of preparation method on • product acceptance was not increased by combining with familiar carrier products, however was strongly influenced by (sweet/savory), seasoning (western, Asian), degree of acceptance perceived appropriateness of carrier products processing (visible/not visible) and carrier product • even if visually identical, mealworm preparations were always rated worse than the original not containing insects • further incentives relating to the appearance of food are required to motivate consumers to eat insects Vanhonacker et al., 2013 [30] online survey in Belgium (N = 221) insects acceptance of different options for a • lowest acceptance of insect proteins compared to insect-free alternatives more sustainable diet (e.g. plant-based • insect consumption motivated only by sustainability considerations seems not to be a promising option meat substitute, organic meat, meat reduction) Verbeke, 2015 [12] online survey in Belgium (N = 368) insects willingness to consume insects as a meat • 19% agree, 16% unsure, 65% disagree substitute • gender, previous insect consumption, food neophobia, food technology neophobia and awareness of environmental footprint of food were important factors for willingness to eat insects Verneau et al., 2016 [29] implicit association test in Denmark and Italy information videos, chocolate bars effect of communication about social • 80% of participants indicated that they ate the bar (N = 282) made from insect protein and individual advantages of insect • information provision positively influenced intention and consequently behavior; negative implicit attitudes consumption on the intention to eat did not weaken the effect insects; influence of implicit attitude on • information communication about individual and social advantages of insect consumption can positively willingness to eat an insect bar influence willingness to eat

Tab. 1: Overview of key quantitative studies on perception and acceptance of insects as food *Article published in a journal which is not listed on the Web of Science and thereby has no impact factor.

46 Ernaehrungs Umschau international | 3/2017 Copyright! Reproduction and dissemination – also partial – applicable to all media only with written permission of Umschau Zeitschriftenverlag GmbH, Wiesbaden.

Ernaehrungs Umschau international | 3/2017 47 Copyright! Reproduction and dissemination – also partial – applicable to all media only with Science & Research | Overview written permission of Umschau Zeitschriftenverlag GmbH, Wiesbaden.

only 19% of people surveyed stated to prevent people from consuming ever, combining insects with fami- that they would be prepared to eat potentially harmful substances [20]. liar fl avors is not suffi cient enough insects as a meat substitute [12]. A Disgust reactions may represent the to increase acceptance. In one study similarly low level of willingness greatest hurdle to the introduction from the Netherlands [16], parti- was also observed in Germany [13]. of insects in the Western food mar- cipants felt that several taste com- If the respondents had a choice, they ket. In a study in the USA, 57% of binations were unsuitable, which preferred products not containing the 200 people surveyed rejected in- again had a negative impact on insects to products containing insects as food, owing to the resultant acceptance. Sweet preparations sects [14–16]. E.g. in a Dutch sur- disgust [17]. Disgust and other ne- containing insects were rated par- vey, only 4% chose a snack con- gative emotional associations with ticularly negatively. In general, taining insects [14]. Men seem to insects as food are accompanied by this strategy also risks triggering react somewhat more positively to a reduced willingness to eat [21]. A the thought of contamination and insects as food than women [12, negative taste expectation, an unfa- people may perceive the insects as a 13, 15, 17]. Apart from gender, no miliar consistency and uncertainty contaminant [9, 21]. socio-demographic factors have so as to the origin of the food are typi- Surveys from different countries far been identifi ed as having an in- cal triggers for a rejection based on show that consumers are more li- fl uence on the acceptance of insects disgust [22, 23]. kely to be prepared to eat processed as food. insect products where the disgust The cultural sphere in which we triggering optical stimuli are no grow up and live has a strong infl u- Overcoming disgust longer present [13, 15, 17]. An ex- ence on what we accept as food and periment carried out at ETH Zürich what we do not accept. In contrast Positive taste experiences with in- [25] also showed that the consump- to most Europeans, people e.g. in sects can reduce negative affective tion of processed products, e.g. in- China are familiar with the idea of reactions. Consequently, people who sect chips (ͷ Figure 3), can create a eating insects [13]. There are signifi - have eaten insects in the past indi- positive taste experience and increase cant differences when you compare cate a generally higher willingness willingness to eat unprocessed in- the image which insects have as a to eat [13, 24, 25] and also express sects. However, it should be noted food in different cultural spheres. a higher willingness to eat insects in that if products are not sensorially Insects such as e.g. fried silkworms future [24]. Tasting insects, e.g. as satisfying, the aversion to insects is (ͷ Figure 1) are perceived as more part of a so-called “bug banquet”, further increased. If the insect pro- familiar and nutritious in China can generate this kind of positive duct tastes bad when it is fi rst tasted, than in Germany (ͷ Figure 2). In taste experience and lead to a more it is doubtful whether consumers Western cultures, insects tend to be positive attitude to entomophagy would be prepared to overcome their associated with food contamination, [24, 26, 27]. But it should be noted aversion a second time [28]. health risks or even with a primitive that people with a very negative at- diet [13, 17–19]. titude are often not prepared to take Another method for increasing wil- A typical reaction to things which these kinds of tasting opportunities lingness to eat insects is based on in- people have learnt are inedible or [26, 28]. formation provision about entomo- which are unknown to them as A combination of processed or un- phagy and insect products [27, 29]. food is disgust. From an evolutio- processed insects served with fa- However, affective disgust reactions nary perspective, this emotion is a miliar carrier products such as e.g. are barely infl uenced by awareness protective mechanism which used salad or spaghetti [15] or prepared and education alone. As previously with familiar sauces and fl avors [24] explained, it may also be wise to were identifi ed as further strategies consider the image of different insect which could increase acceptance of species, which can have an impact unfamiliar foods. These measures on feelings of disgust. E.g. Thai par- can remove uncertainty and reduce ticipants stated that they associate negative taste expectations. How- worm-like insects with rotting and

Fig. 3: Insect chips (partially with insect fl our) [own photo] Participants who had previously knowingly eaten insect chips (in- tervention group) showed a higher willingness to eat unprocessed insects than those who had eaten normal chips (control group). Infl uence was evident in whether participants had already eaten insects, whether they were extremely sensitive to disgust and whether they tended to food-neophobic reactions [25].

48 Ernaehrungs Umschau international | 3/2017 Copyright! Reproduction and dissemination – also partial – applicable to all media only with written permission of Umschau Zeitschriftenverlag GmbH, Wiesbaden.

decay and would prefer giant water who place great importance on re- References bugs to the mealworm preferred gular and abundant meat consump- in the Netherlands. Among Dutch tion find meat substitute products 1. Van Huis A, Van Itterbeeck J, Klunder H et study participants, the association less attractive [15]. However, in- al. Edible insects. Future prospects for food was precisely the opposite [9]. How- sects could be a promising option and feed security. Food and Agriculture Or- ever, no quantitative study has been for those consumer groups which ganization of the United Nations (FAO), carried out to date on the effect of value a sustainable food choice and Rom (2013) the image of an insect species on ac- look for alternatives to traditionally 2. Nowak V, Persijn D, Rittenschober D et al. ceptance. This should be taken into produced animal proteins [6]. The (2016) Review of food composition data for account in future studies. It is also question remains as to whether inedible insects. Food Chem 193: 39–46 currently unclear as to what extent sects and insect proteins would ac- 3. Belluco S, Losasso C, Maggioletti M et al. other factors such as meal con- tually be consumed as a substitute (2013) Edible insects in a food safety and text (e.g. restaurant, canteen) may or whether they would be consu- nutritional perspective: a critical review. have an impact on acceptance and med in addition to traditional ani- Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf 12: 296–313 whether certain styles of prepara- mal proteins. Whether insects ac- 4. Verkerk MC, Tramper J, van Trijp JC et al. tion (e.g. snack, accompaniment to tually have the potential to gain a (2007) Insect cells for human food. Biotech- main meal) may be accompanied permanent position in the western nol Adv 25: 198–202 by a higher level of acceptance than diet remains an unanswered ques- 5. Payne CLR, Scarborough P, Rayner M et others. tion. Current data emphasize that al. (2016) A systematic review of nutrient further research is required to better composition data available for twelve com- understand how consumers might mercially available edible insects, and com- Summary be persuaded to consume insects. parison with reference values. Trends Food Sci Tech 47: 69–77 Various approaches have hitherto 6. Smetana S, Mathys A, Knoch A et al. (2015) been put forward in an attempt to Outlook Meat alternatives: life cycle assessment of make insects more attractive to wes- most known meat substitutes. Int J Life tern consumers. As long as the in- The use of insects as food or fod- Cycle Assess 20: 1254–1267 sect is visible as a whole, these stra- der on a larger scale would require 7. Jongeman Y. World list of edible insects tegies are probably more interesting the industrial cultivation of insects 2015. (2015) URL: www.wur.nl/up for consumers who are looking for under controlled conditions. There load_mm/7/4/1/ca8baa25-b035-4bd2- a culinary adventure. It is unlikely is a need for research on the tech- 9fdc-a7df1405519a_WORLD%20LIST%20 that people who are more cautious nological treatment and proces- EDIBLE%20INSECTS%202015.pdf Zugriff when it comes to trying new food sing methods and on toxicological, 01.08.16 would feel attracted by this appro- microbial and hygienic safety [31]. 8. Hartmann C, Siegrist M (2017) Consumer ach. A promising method to increase The possible allergenic potential of perception and behavior regarding sustain- willingness to eat insects is to offer insects should also not be ignored. able protein consumption: a systematic re- products made from processed in- view. Trends Food Sci Tech 61: 11–25 sects. However, many of these pro- 9. Tan HSG, Fischer ARH, Tinchan P et al. (2015) ducts (e.g. insect chips) are not an Insects as food: exploring cultural exposure and alternative to meat – this food choice Conflict of Interest individual experience as determinants of accept- is barely more sustainable. Processed The authors declare no conflict of interest. ance. Food Qual Prefer 42: 78–89 insects can however increase consu- 10. Balzan S, Fasolato L, Maniero S et al. mers’ acceptance of unprocessed in- (2016) Edible insects and young adults in a sects. In addition, marketing about Dr. Christina Hartmann1 north-east Italian city an exploratory study. insects must try to generate positive Prof. Dr. Michael Siegrist Brit Food J 118: 318–326 ETH Zürich associations, which may overcome Department Health Science and Technology 11. House J (2016) Consumer acceptance of in- the negative emotion profile relating Consumer Behavior Group sect-based foods in the Netherlands: aca- to the idea of eating insects. To this 1E-Mail: [email protected] demic and commercial implications. Appetite end, it seems necessary that additi- 107: 47–58 onal incentives such as e.g. positive 12. Verbeke W (2015) Profiling consumers who effects on health are communicated are ready to adopt insects as a meat substi- alongside the argument for a more tute in a western society. Food Qual Prefer sustainable food choice [13, 16, 30]. 39: 147–155 Overall, it is evident that it will be 13. Hartmann C, Shi J, Giusto A et al. (2015) a great challenge to convince wes- The psychology of eating insects: a cross-cul- tern consumers of the advantage tural comparison between Germany and of entomophagy. Meat enthusiasts China. Food Qual Prefer 44: 148–156

Ernaehrungs Umschau international | 3/2017 49 Copyright! Reproduction and dissemination – also partial – applicable to all media only with Science & Research | Overview written permission of Umschau Zeitschriftenverlag GmbH, Wiesbaden.

14. de Boer J, Schösler H, Boersema JJ (2013) of insect-, plant- and meat-based burgers Motivational differences in food orientation under blind, expected and informed condi- and the choice of snacks made from lentils, tions. Food Qual Prefer 52: 27–31 locusts, seaweed or “hybrid” meat. Food 29. Verneau F, La Barbera F, Kolle S et al. Qual Prefer 28: 32–35 (2016) The effect of communication and im- 15. Schosler H, de Boer J, Boersema JJ (2012) plicit associations on consuming insects: an Can we cut out the meat of the dish? Con- experiment in Denmark and Italy. Appetite structing consumer-oriented pathways to- 106: 30-36 wards meat substitution. Appetite 58: 39–47 30. Vanhonacker F, Van Loo EJ, Gellynck X et al. 16. Tan HSG, van den Berg E, Steger M (2016) (2013) Flemish consumer attitudes towards The influence of product preparation, famili- more sustainable food choices. Appetite 62: arity and individual traits on the consumer 7–16 acceptance of insects as food. Food Qual Pre- 31. Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung (BfR). fer 52: 222–231 Insekten als Lebens- und Futtermittel – 17. Ruby MB, Rozin P, Chan C (2015) Determi- Nahrung der Zukunft? Pressemeldung vom nants of willingness to eat insects in the USA 24.05.2016 URL: www.bfr.bund.de/de/ and India. J Insect Food Feed 1: 215–225 presseinformation/2016/16/insekten_als_ 18. Kellert SR (1993) Values and perceptions of lebens__und_futtermittel___nahrung_der_ invertebrates. Conserv Biol 7: 845–855 zukunft_-197550.html Zugriff 08.10.16 19. Looy H, Dunkel FV, Wood JR (2014) How 32. Caparros Megido R, Gierts C, Blecker C et al. then shall we eat? Insect-eating attitudes (2016) Consumer acceptance of insect-based and sustainable foodways. Agric Human alternative meat products in western coun- Values 31: 131–141 tries. Food Qual Prefer 52: 237–243 20. Chapman HA, Anderson AK (2012) Under- 33. Tan HSG, Fischer ARH, van Trijp HCM et al. standing disgust. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1251: (2016) Tasty but nasty? Exploring the role 62–76 of sensory-liking and food appropriateness 21. Gmuer A, Nuessli Guth J, Hartmann C et in the willingness to eat unusual novel foods al. (2016) Effects of the degree of processing like insects. Food Qual Prefer 48: 293–302 of insect ingredients in snacks on expected emotional experiences and willingness to eat. Food Qual Prefer 54: 117–127 DOI: 10.4455/eu.2017.010 22. Martins Y, Pliner P (2006) „Ugh! That‘s disgusting!“: identification of the character- istics of foods underlying rejections based on disgust. Appetite 46: 75–85 23. Tuorila H, Meiselman HL, Bell R et al. (1994) Role of sensory and cognitive information in the enhancement of certainty and linking for novel and familiar foods. Appe- tite 23: 231–246 24. Caparros Megido R, Sablon L, Geuens M et al. (2014) Edible insects acceptance by Belgian consumers: promising attitude for entomophagy development. J Sens Stud 29: 14–20 25. Hartmann C, Siegrist M (2016) Becoming an insectivore: results of an experiment. Food Qual Prefer 51: 118–122 26. Lensvelt EJ, Steenbekkers LP (2014) Explor- ing consumer acceptance of entomophagy: a survey and experiment in Australia and the Netherlands. Ecol Food Nutr 53: 543–561 27. Looy H, Wood JR (2006) Attitudes toward invertebrates: are educational „bug banquets“ effective? J Environ Educ 37: 37–48 28. Schouteten JJ, De Steur H, De Pelsmaeker S et al. (2016) Emotional and sensory profiling

50 Ernaehrungs Umschau international | 3/2017