Vegan burger, no thanks! Juicy American burger, yes please! The effect of restaurant meal names on affective appeal

Abstract

Reducing meat consumption could materially reduce global greenhouse gas emissions. Yet, meat consumption habits are exceptionally difficult to break, even more so when plant-based meals are described using unappealing names. Past interventions that attempted to alter consumer choice by changing meal names at restaurants reported only modest effects. We propose that interventions aimed at increasing demand for plant-based meals may be more effective if: (1) meal naming is informed by theory; (2) the affective appeal of meal names is tested before deployment; (3) meat-based meal names are deliberately kept basic; and (4) heterogeneity of different meat-eater segments is accounted for. We conduct three studies. Study 1 evaluates the appeal of several alternative theory-informed names of plant-based meals, highlighting taste, provenience, and/or texture. Study 2 assesses the effectiveness of appealing names on stated plant-based choices across the general Australian population, and Study 3 for market segments of meat-eaters. Results indicate that highlighting flavour, provenience, and texture can impact the appeal of plant-based meals. Increased appeal does not translate to increased plant-based meal choices across all consumers but does have a potential impact for a specific group of more flexible meat-eaters. We conclude that using appealing names for plant-based dishes on restaurant menus may represent a cost-effective way to entice specific market segments of consumers to choose plant-based rather than meat-based dishes when dining. With food contributing nearly 25% to global emissions, changing meal choices for even the smallest of market segments can make a meaningful contribution to climate change mitigation.