Speaking of Psychology · American Psychological Association

Meat and morality: Will people eat lab-grown meat? With Matti Wilks, PhD, and Daniel Rosenfeld, PhD

·37 min·3 clips

Why are vegetarians more grossed out by cultured meat than meat-eaters, despite its animal welfare benefits?

1. Speaking of Psychology hosts a conversation on the psychology of cultured meat with two researchers who have studied consumer attitudes and dietary behavior. 2. Dr. Matti Wilks, a lecturer at the University of Edinburgh, studies moral motivations, concern for animals, and the 'natural is better' bias; Dr. Daniel Rosenfeld, a postdoctoral scholar at UCLA, researches eating behavior, vegetarianism, and cultured meat attitudes. 3. The episode's core question is why a significant portion of consumers refuse to try cultured meat even when they acknowledge its environmental and animal welfare benefits over factory farming. 4. Cultured meat is produced by extracting stem cells from a living animal via biopsy and growing those cells into actual animal tissue, requiring no slaughter — distinct from both conventional meat and plant-based analogs like the Impossible Burger. 5. Approximately two-thirds of surveyed consumers say they would try cultured meat, but only about one-third say they would integrate it as a dietary staple rather than just a novelty taste. 6. Around 20% of some samples express categorical moral opposition, stating that cultured meat would be wrong 'no matter how small the risk and how great the benefit,' which Rosenfeld identifies as a moralized taboo response. 7. Wilks identifies 'unnaturalness' as the dominant negative association, with qualitative interview subjects describing cultured meat as 'frankenmeat' and invoking 'playing God' as a moral objection. 8. Rosenfeld connects this moral opposition to religiosity and beliefs about a God-given natural order, as well as economic concerns among rural, conservative communities whose livelihoods depend on traditional agriculture. 9. In a surprising finding, Rosenfeld found that vegetarians are substantially more averse to cultured meat than meat eaters, driven by physical disgust toward meat as a category regardless of how it was produced. 10. Wilks notes that while most consumers can identify the environmental and animal welfare benefits of cultured meat, these are 'distal' concerns that do not govern in-store purchasing decisions. 11. Rosenfeld argues the four non-negotiables for mainstream adoption are price, taste, convenience, and social normalcy, using McDonald's dominance as evidence that ethics do not drive mass food choices. 12. Social normalcy functions as a subconscious safety heuristic — eating what peers eat signals that a food is safe, trustworthy, and socially acceptable. 13. Scalability and production cost remain the primary barriers to retail availability in the U.S., not consumer sentiment; no major cultured meat company has delivered on earlier predictions of shelf availability by 2021. 14. Three states — Mississippi, Florida, and Alabama — have enacted laws banning the sale of cultured meat, which Wilks attributes partly to the economic interests of traditional agricultural communities. 15. Rosenfeld identifies pandemic risk reduction as an underappreciated benefit: the billions of farmed animals in close proximity increase the likelihood of zoonotic disease events like COVID-19 or the current H5N1 bird flu outbreak. 16. A Trends in Cognitive Sciences paper authored by Rosenfeld reviewed the broad psychology of cultured meat, finding that moral purity concerns — not harm-reduction values — are the strongest predictors of opposition in Wilks's research. 17. The episode is a relaxed three-way academic conversation with host Kim Mills asking clarifying questions and the two researchers frequently deferring to each other's complementary findings. 18. The tone is exploratory rather than advocacy-driven; both researchers acknowledge limits of cross-cultural data and avoid oversimplifying the science. 19. Listeners interested in food psychology, consumer behavior, animal ethics, or the future of protein will find this episode substantive. 20. Listeners looking for practical cooking, nutrition advice, or policy debate will find the episode too abstract.

As heard by us

A sharp psychology-first look at why lab-grown meat may be approved before it feels edible.

Cultured meat is treated here less as a food-tech breakthrough than as a test of what people are willing to call food. Kim Mills guides the conversation through the psychology around lab-grown meat, with Matti Wilks and Daniel Rosenfeld discussing disgust, moral values,…

Read the full review in PlayNext →

Why you'd press play

Why cultured meat can still feel like a hard sell

Read the full recommendation in PlayNext →

Listen to the show on

Apple Podcasts Spotify

Play clips from this episode More from Speaking of Psychology