Insect-Based Food: A (Free) Choice

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript reviewed insect-based foods. It contains some interesting results and discussion. Few concepts need to be clarified before acceptation:

• How to distinguish the insect-based foods in here and traditional food, such as shrimp?
• The Conclusion talked too much culture and social terms, the reviewer would like to see authors’ comments on how to develop and improve this kinds of foods, such as processing or protein extraction technologies.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We greatly appreciate your review. We also would like to thank you for your time and helpful input, and we report that this part was improved (lines 51-58 of the final version, as well as lines 582-584).

" In the European Union, edible insects, in whole or in part, fall within the definition of novel foods given by the European Commission - a type of food that does not have a significant history of consumption or is produced by a method that has not been used before for nutrition.

According to the regulations published by EFSA on January 13, 2021, the yellow flour worm (Tenebrio molitor) is considered a safe food for human consumption; on 2 July 2021, EFSA published the scientific opinion that frozen, dried, or ground migratory grasshoppers (Locusta migratoria) are safe for human consumption; on 17 August 2021, EFSA published another assessment on house crickets (Acheta domesticus), which is frozen and dried forms are safe for consumption."

“Processing technologies, or protein extraction, can transform the original food. Through dehydration, drying, crushing, etc. it is possible to alter the physical aspects of insect-based foods, preventing them from being perceived, for example by the eyes, and masking their taste.”

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper entitled “Insect-based food: a (free) choice” deals with a very interesting topic. In general, I appreciate the aims of this work; it is quite interesting and informative to most readers of this field.

However, I have the following comments that hopefully help the authors improve their paper:

·       The structure (outline) of the paper could be given at the end of the introductory chapter.

·       I suggest that the authors add a research method diagram. This will provide a snapshot of the research steps followed and will help the reader in a clearer understanding of the paper.

·       The literature review is not clear, which make it hard to understand the relationship between this work and the previous research. Furthermore, it would be better if authors can have a table comparing the closely related works on various dimensions and clearly showing the contribution of the paper.

·       What are the limitations of the study in terms of the proposed method, data used, approaches, and/or analysis?

·       The authors should convince the readers of this journal, that their contribution is so important. These issues deserve a deeper discussion: What are the managerial implications from this work? What are the implications for theory and practice? How decision or policy makers could benefit from this study.

·       The conclusions are slight, please add the description of the future work, several potential futures research should be addressed. I believe the authors can make a stronger contribution out of the conducted study.

·       As usual a final thorough proof-reading is recommended.

 I encourage the author to think along those questions and to develop this work further along those lines.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We greatly appreciate your review. We also would like to thank you for your time and helpful input, and we report that this part was improved (lines 93-97).

“Following this introduction, the paper presents a theoretical framework that includes intention, defined as a function of individual and social beliefs, as well as the influence of sensory perception. With the help of VOSviewer version 1.6.18, this research identified a few articles related to insect-based foods. Then, the methodology employed was defined, and the results were presented and discussed. Finally, the main conclusions were highlighted.”

2) We would like to report that this part was improved. A methodological diagram was added (figure 4). Furthermore, figure 4 was added in the methodology section (lines 169-174).

“The literature review considered that intention precedes behavior and aimed to develop and apply a model that would support the desired behavior. In this sense, aspects related to attitude, social norms, and sensory perception were identified. However, to understand more about what was being studied in the field of insects, with the help of the artificial intelligence algorithm, a second search was developed with the main articles indexed on the Web of Science regarding insect-based foods.”

 3) We also would like to report that this part was improved (lines 593-599).

“In terms of limitation, considering that it is a food, it would be suggested to develop specific research on sensory perception. The taste, as well as the state of matter (liquid, solid), the temperature (ambient temperature, hot, cold, etc.), the appearance (quantity, distribution, color, appearance, etc.), the smell (mild/intense, pleasant/unfriendly, etc.), the texture (thick/low consistent, solid/liquid, etc.), should be further investigated. Besides, insect welfare might be relevant to consumers’ perceptions [80]. In a circular economy, from the perspective of resource utilization, insect food and the supply chains for these raw materials are some of the aspects to be considered in insect production [81].”

4) We would like to report that this part was improved (lines 582-592).

” Processing technologies, or protein extraction, can transform the original food. Through dehydration, drying, crushing, etc. it is possible to alter the physical aspects of insect-based foods, preventing them from being perceived, for example by the eyes, and masking their taste.

Why are these influencing variables so important? For the theory, the consequences were related to the relevance of the individual and social beliefs to taste new food products, as well as the sensory perception. The main practical implications were related to the structural aspects that can represent barriers to changing the behavior and, consequently, sustainability. The academic environment in which the questionnaire was applied is a good framework for holding scientific information sessions to bring arguments for individual beliefs - the nutritional value of these foods, food security, etc. Nevertheless, policymakers and leaders can take the opportunity and get benefits from good practices, which can drive us to sustainable development and are suitable for the environment.

5) We also would like to report that this part was improved (lines 593-599).

“In terms of limitation, considering that it is a food, it would be suggested to develop specific research on sensory perception. The taste, as well as the state of matter (liquid, solid), the temperature (ambient temperature, hot, cold, etc.), the appearance (quantity, distribution, color, appearance, etc.), the smell (mild/intense, pleasant/unfriendly, etc.), the texture (thick/low consistent, solid/liquid, etc.), should be further investigated. Besides, insect welfare might be relevant to consumers’ perceptions [80]. In a circular economy, from the perspective of resource utilization, insect food and the supply chains for these raw materials are some of the aspects to be considered in insect production [81].”

6) Finally, we would like to report that the proofreading was implemented and improved the paper. Thus, we greatly appreciate your review. We believe that it is a helpful input. Thank you!

All the best,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Authors

Very interesting article. Following are some of the comments/or suggestions:

1)  Abstract is bit long. Restrict it to 200 words.

2) Line 58-60 - It should be "animal-based protein will be insufficient...."

3) Line 70 Replace underlie with underline

4) Following papers could be of interest: "Codesign of Food System and Circular Economy Approaches for the Development of Livestock Feeds from Insect Larvae" "Edible Insects as Food–Insect Welfare and Ethical Aspects from a Consumer Perspective" "Consumers' acceptance of the first novel insect food approved in the European Union: Predictors of yellow mealworm chips consumption"

5) Methodology - this section needs to improve . The first paragraph is not in line with the rest. 

6) Results of qualitative results - There is no explanation. It starts with numerical results.

7) Some of the information is repeated over and over throughout the paper.

8) Conclusion - this section to be shortened.  

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We greatly appreciate your review. We also would like to thank you for your time and helpful input, and we report that this part was improved (page 1):

1) "The literature highlights the importance of insect consumption for nutritional health habits. The increasingly clear legislation, the developed studies that demonstrated their nutritional value, and overcoming some barriers that prevented consumers from consuming insects are among the reasons supporting the advantages of consuming insects. The leading determinants of consumption are culture and individual and social beliefs, accessibility to this food resource, and individual behavior. The barriers to neophobia were analyzed by evaluating factors of influence and their respective relationship and meaning through quantitative research to measure the significance of the results. To develop a conceptual model that aims to change eating behavior and recognize structural aspects that can be barriers in the process of changing eating behavior, a methodological framework was developed. The methodological framework aimed to identify the characteristics that can be associated with the profile of opinion leaders, and the questionnaire, was applied to 213 young people. Moreover, the Structural Equation Model was the statistical technique used. Given the projected population growth and increasing life expectancy, nutrition is a challenge in terms of health, as well as economic, social, and environmental. Aiming for sustainability, it is crucial to identify nutrition alternatives within the circular economy."

2) Line 60 - It should be "animal-based protein will be insufficient...."

3) Line 71 Replace underlie with underline.

4) These references help to improve the paper (lines 201-208; lines 597-599). Thank you!

“Nevertheless, the perceived lower environmental impact was considered as an appreciated characteristic [58].”

“Besides, insect welfare might be relevant to consumers’ perceptions [80]. In a circular economy, from the perspective of resource utilization, insect food and the supply chains for these raw materials are some of the aspects to be considered in insect production [81].”

5) We greatly appreciate your review. We also would like to thank you for your time and helpful input, and we report that the methodology section was improved. A research method diagram was added (Figure 4, page 7). Besides, the first paragraph was removed. In addition, the methodology was improved (lines 231-236).

“A pre-test of the questionnaire was performed before implementing it. In addition, the instrument (questionnaire) was divided into three parts which were in accordance with the following objectives: i) to know the profile of the sample: ii) to assess the significance of the influencing factors, and iii) to assess the percentage and profile of influencers (opinion leaders) of innovation. Moreover, the validation process of the translation was carried out so that the questionnaire could be available in each country's language.”

6) We would like to report that this part was improved (lines 259-266).

“Considering that are numerous factors whit influence the decision to try an unknown food, the main objective was defined to understand the characteristics and attributes or factors which influence the intention of individuals regarding trying new food products."

This research highlights three main variables: intention, attitude (individual beliefs), and social norms (social beliefs), as well as the influence of sensory perception on trying new foods [32]. Thus, this research developed and applied a questionnaire to identify sociodemographic aspects of the respondents, as well as their beliefs and perceptions.”

7)We would like to report that we redesigned our discussion sections so as not to repeat the information. Now it contains the resume and results of our research (lines 446 – 545).

8) We would like to report that this part was improved.

Finally, we greatly appreciate your review. Thank you! We believe that it is a helpful input.

All the best,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript has significantly improved as compared to the previous version. Indeed, the authors tried to improve it, and the main weaknesses are solved.

Thus, in my opinion, the manuscript is recommendable for publication.