Consumer Evaluation of Plant-Based Ground Beef Alternatives in Real-World Eating Scenarios

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the palatability of 3 plant-based ground beef alternatives (GBA) in comparison to ground beef under real-world hamburger and taco scenarios. The 3 plant-based GBA alternatives used represented a modern GBA sold at retail (RGBA), a modern GBA sold in foodservice (FGBA), and a traditional soy-based GBA (TGBA). Additionally, 80% lean ground beef was evaluated. Consumers (N = 240; n = 120 per panel type) evaluated samples for juiciness, tenderness, texture, beef flavor, overall flavor, overall liking, purchase intent, and purchase price and rated traits as either acceptable or unacceptable. For hamburger panels, consumers were served samples on buns and were given the option to add cheese, lettuce, pickles, ketchup, and/or mustard. For taco panels, samples were seasoned with a taco seasoning blend and served on flour tortillas, with consumers given the option to add cheese, lettuce, and/or tomatoes. In both scenarios, ground beef was rated higher (P < 0.05) by consumers for juiciness, texture liking, overall flavor liking, beef flavor liking, overall liking, purchase intent, and price willing to be paid than all 3 GBA but was rated similar (P > 0.05) for tenderness to FGBA and RGBA. Additionally, a higher (P < 0.05) percentage of ground beef samples were rated acceptable overall and for flavor characteristics than all 3 GBA. Few differences were found between FGBA and RGBA for any palatability characteristics evaluated. TGBA was rated lower (P < 0.05) than all other treatments for all palatability traits for taco panels and was similar (P > 0.05) to only RGBA for beef flavor and overall flavor liking within hamburger panels. These results indicate that GBA currently available to consumers do not have improved palatability characteristics when used as an ingredient in a taco or hamburger scenario.