For anyone on the fence about eating insect-based foods, a tasting experiment may be enough to change some minds.
To discover how consumers respond to insect-based foods, researchers from the University of Beira Interior in Portugal measured the brain activity and heart rate of people while they sampled insect foods. The scientists also incorporated traditional surveys into their research.
Thirty-eight adults who had never tried insect-based foods before participated in the study. They tasted both an insect protein bar and a cereal bar while the researchers measured their physiological responses.
The findings were presented at the Society for the Study of Ingestive Behavior’s annual meeting.
“The researchers expected participants to have low awareness of insect-based foods, prefer the cereal bar and show stronger physiological reactions to the insect-based product,” a news release on the study noted. “Instead, the findings revealed that people were often more curious and receptive than expected.”
Some of the participants were made aware of which bar they were eating, while others were told they were eating a cereal bar, when it actually contained insects.
“The physiological measurements showed that participants became more attentive and engaged while consuming the insect-based bars,” the release said.
Participants’ heart rates also increased during the tasting sessions, indicating “heightened arousal and attentiveness.” This response was present even when participants didn’t know they were consuming an insect-based product.
Most participants said they preferred the insect bar over the cereal bar, the researchers found. They also determined that “curiosity and attention may outweigh initial disgust toward insect-based foods.”
The findings align with previous polling that suggests Americans may be more open to insect-based foods than commonly assumed. A 2021 YouGov survey found that 25% of Americans were willing to ingest insect ingredients, while 18% said they would be willing to eat whole bugs.
“The findings were very surprising,” said lead author Andreia C. B. Ferreira, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Beira Interior.
“This was really an unexpected result as literature said to us that consumers tend to reject these novel foods. The results show us the relevance of tasting experiments on promoting this new alternative.”
The edible insect market is expanding, according to Fortune Business Insights, which estimates the global market will grow from $1.73 billion in 2025 to $13.23 billion by 2034, driven by growing interest in sustainable nutrition, resource efficiency and diversified protein sources.
Beetles dominated the insect-based food market in 2025, with 33% of the share, Persistence Market Research reported.
The yellow mealworm and lesser mealworm also topped the list, while crickets and grasshoppers were the fast-growing insect type segment.
Ashley Gearhardt, Ph.D., a professor of psychology at the University of Michigan, told Fox News Digital that it’s “exciting to see that consumers may be open to new abundant sources of nutrition.”
“We are going to have to be creative to make sure people are fed and nourished in the 21st century — and this study suggests we may be more curious and willing to try new things,” added Gearhardt, who was not involved in the study.
Several insect-based food products are already available to consumers. Chirps Chips are tortilla-style chips made with cricket flour, while other companies market cricket protein powders and snack bars.
Jiminy’s grain-free cookies for dogs are made with crickets and grubs.
Insect-based foods should be promoted as new and beneficial for both their nutritional and sustainability aspects, Ferreira said.
Exposing people to unfamiliar foods through sample tastings may cause them to view the novel foods differently, the researchers concluded.
“In this study, participants often expressed uncertainty or surprise when discussing insect-based foods before tasting them, yet many reported positive reactions after trying the product,” according to the release.
It also noted that this was a very small study — and that larger, more diverse studies are necessary to gain more conclusive information.
Read the full article here
