Changing consumer behaviour in virtual reality: A systematic literature review

Virtual Reality (VR) has evolved rapidly and has been increasingly used in research aimed at promoting behaviour change within consumer domains, particularly since the introduction of head-mounted displays (HMDs). The aim of this systematic review is to examine 1) the validity of VR in this type of research (i.e. is behaviour in VR accurately captured, compared to behaviour in real-life), and 2) the effectiveness of using VR as a tool to change behaviour in consumer domains. 24 articles (27 studies) are included in this review. The findings indicate that VR can potentially be validly used in consumer research aimed at behaviour change in a consumer setting, as findings in real-life were mostly replicated in VR (or vice versa), though the number of studies is relatively low and were mostly conducted in the food domain using student samples. Furthermore, studies which used VR as a behaviour change tool were generally effective in changing consumer behaviour in desired directions, more so than when less immersive (2D), equivalent treatments were used. Future research can focus on extending behavioural research frameworks to include VR in their scope and applying more interactive VR environments to more fully take advantage of VR possibilities for consumer research

Social Norms Support the Protein Transition: The Relevance of Social Norms to Explain Increased Acceptance of Alternative Protein Burgers over 5 Years

Developing alternative protein products—based on protein sources other than regular meat—is a possible pathway to counter environmental and health burdens. However, alternative proteins are not always accepted by consumers, and more research is needed to support a shift to more alternative proteins. Prior studies have mainly focused on individual drivers and perceptions; although we expect that social norms—the perceptions of the opinions of relevant others—are highly relevant in accepting alternative proteins. Online surveys were conducted among 2461 respondents in 2015 and 2000 respondents in 2019 (cross-sectional datasets); a subsample (n = 500) responded to both surveys (longitudinal dataset). We add to the literature by (1) demonstrating the added explanatory value of social norms beyond a range of individual drivers; (2) showing that this finding holds over time, and (3) comparing the impact of social norms across different dietary consumer groups. Meat lovers and flexitarians are more prone to follow social norms whereas meat abstainers are more prone to follow their individual attitudes and values. This study highlights the relevance of investigations beyond personal variables such as personal norms and attitudes and underscores the relevance of considering the social aspects of accepting alternative proteins

Veg on the menu? Differences in menu design interventions to increase vegetarian food choice between meat-reducers and non-reducers

Reduced meat intake by Western consumers would benefit public health and the environment. However, meat consumption is notoriously difficult to change, among other things because it is often the outcome of automatic and habitual behavior. Interventions that make use of automatic decision-making processes are therefore promising, but these too vary in their success. The effectiveness of interventions may be improved if different types of meat-eaters are separated. Thus, the aim of this study was to test the effectiveness of two kinds of intervention (namely, changing to a vegetarian default on a menu and changing the attractiveness of a food label) on vegetarian food choice for two distinct groups: meat-eaters who are not reducing their meat intake (non-reducers) and meat-reducers. We also explored whether the effect of these interventions could be strengthened by activating different roles (i.e. a consumer role versus a citizen role). The online study included two European countries, Denmark (n = 740) and the Netherlands (n = 749), and involved two experiments. It was found that a vegetarian default significantly increased vegetarian food choice among the non-reducers but did not significantly do so among meat-reducers. Attractive labeling marginally increased vegetarian food choice for non-reducers but had no impact on meat-reducers. The activation of roles did not influence food choice. We conclude that meat-reducing interventions, especially where the menu default is concerned, could benefit from increased focus on a more specific target audience (i.e. non-reducers). More generally, we recommend that future meat-reducing interventions should consider different groups of meat-eaters

Understanding intentions to purchase bio-based products : The role of subjective ambivalence

This article aims to explore whether subjective ambivalence increases the understanding of consumers' intentions to buy bio-based products. Subjective ambivalence is the aversive feeling that accompanies evaluations containing both negative and positive elements. Two studies (N = 1851) in six European countries show that subjective ambivalence increases the explained variance beyond vested exploratory variables: emotions and variables of the theory of planned behaviour. This finding implies that the intention to purchase bio-based products is based on more than cognitive deliberations or emotions; it is also associated with an aversive feeling of subjective ambivalence. Additionally, this article divides attitudes into risks and benefits associated with bio-based products and thereby shows that subjective ambivalence strengthens the association between risks and intentions and not that between benefits and intentions. Highly ambivalent consumers are more sensitive to risks than less ambivalent consumers, whereas for the sensitivity to benefits there are no differences between individuals with high and low ambivalence. In conclusion, to understand public opinion regarding bio-based products, it is important to comprehensively monitor and understand ambivalence.</p

Can bio-based attributes upgrade a brand? How partial and full use of bio-based materials affects the purchase intention of brands

To reduce human dependency on fossil fuels, increasing attempts are being made to substitute synthetic materials in products with bio-based materials. Global brands attempt to differentiate themselves by adding bio-based materials to their products. However, little is known about consumers' reactions regarding brands that use bio-based materials. Two experimental studies in six European countries on bio-based products were used to test whether consumers responded differently to brands that use materials that are fully bio-based (i.e., 100% bio-based) compared to brands that use materials that are partially bio-based. The results provide evidence that only brands with attributes that were 100% bio-based consistently resulted in enhanced purchase intentions. Instead, introducing partially bio-based attributes does not always result in a better evaluation of the brand compared to brands that do not contain any bio-based attributes. Additionally, the authors show how these effects occur (i.e., via brand attitude and brand emotions) and under which conditions these effects are enforced (i.e., environmentally conscious consumers and private labels). Finally, these effects are seen for multiple products, brands and countries. The study offers theoretical and practical implications and presents avenues for future research