## 4 Discussion  
[PERSON] [49] distinguishes between three types of social representations (SRs): 1. \"Closed or Hegemonic SRs\"--These are characterized by representational elements that are uniformly distributed and shared throughout the entire population; 2. \"Agonal, Critical, or Polemical SRs\"--These consist of representational elements that are similar across the population, but their meanings are shaped by differing and even conflicting values; 3. \"Open or Emanciapated SRs\"--These feature representational elements that circulate among various subgroups within a population. It is necessary to bring these elements together to uncover their coherence. The social representation of cultured meat, which is the focus of the study discussed in the previous pages, aligns with the latter category, open/emancipated SRs. To facilitate the analysis, the study specifically examines the differences between omnivores (Omni) and vegetarians/vegans (Veg), highlighting only the most significant results due to space considerations. The social representation of cultured meat varies significantly between omnivores and vegetarians. For omnivores, three central elements characterize their representation of cultured meat: 1. \"Sustainability\": Omnivores view cultured meat as a sustainable option that can help reduce the environmental impact of intensive farming; 2. \"Innovation\": They recognize cultured meat as an innovative and unprecedented product that sparks curiosity about its taste, texture, and long-term effects. Previous studies have shown that the innovative nature of cultured meat production significantly influences customer rejection and the overall lack of acceptability of these products [50; 51; 52; 53]. 3. \"Future\": Cultured meat is considered a viable solution for the future, addressing the challenges of increasing meat demand and environmental sustainability. In contrast, vegetarians focus on three different central elements in their representation of cultured meat: 1. \"Sustainability\": Like omnivores, vegetarians also prioritize sustainability. They see cultured meat as a more sustainable alternative to traditional livestock farming that can mitigate environmental harm. 2. \"Ethics\": Ethics plays a crucial role for vegetarians. They perceive cultured meat as a cruelty-free solution that eliminates animal suffering and promotes animal welfare. Also, [PERSON] et al. [54] found that participants who had ethical issues with traditional meat evaluated cultured meat as a better option. 3. \"Science\": Cultured meat is viewed as a product of scientific advancement and technological innovation that can contribute to a more sustainable and ethical future. An analysis of prototypicality and cognitive salience confirms that these elements are central to both omnivores and vegetarians/vegans. This favorable consideration of technology represents the basis of these interviewees' acceptance of cultured meat. Food technology neophobia, in fact, refers to the unwillingness to consume food created by innovative or unfamiliar technology. [PERSON], [PERSON], and [PERSON] [55] found that food technology neophobia was the most significant negative predictor of cultured meat acceptance. Research has also shown that emotions linked to new food and technology influence consumers' judgments about risks and benefits [56; 57]. These results are consistent with some studies that showed that extrinsic attributes of food, such as environmental impact, animal welfare, and food security, influence consumer choices. Many people are motivated to eat cultivated meat for its societal benefits and sustainability rather than personal gain [55]. Studies show consumers prioritize social over individual advantages [20]. Green consumption values contribute to positive attitudes toward cultivated meat, reflecting how ecological ideals shape buying behaviors [58]. Consumers increasingly consider cultivated meat a sustainable alternative [59]. Awareness of environmental issues correlates with support for cultivated meat technology [60].