Perceptions, Knowledge and Culinary Use of Legumes in Australia: A Convenience Sample Analysis

ABSTRACT

Background

Legumes, a staple food from the Leguminosae family, are widely consumed and deliver key food components and nutrients, including dietary fibre and plant protein. Regular consumption is associated with improved health outcomes such as a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease, better weight management, and enhanced gastrointestinal health. However, legume consumption varies globally, and the available Australian data is outdated. The aim of this study was to explore perceptions, knowledge and culinary use of legumes in a convenience sample of Australians.

Methods

An anonymous and voluntary survey was conducted online. Eligible respondents were adults living in Australia who had not received formal nutrition training. Convenience sampling via social media and snowballing were used to recruit respondents.

Results

Three hundred and forty‐nine respondents (84.8% female; 55.1% aged 56 years or older; 54.1% Bachelor's degree or higher) were included in analyses. Most (97.9%) respondents reported consuming legumes, with 24.5% reporting consumption once or twice per week and 27.2% reporting consumption three to four times per week. Perceptions of legumes included their high content of protein and fibre, though confusion was evident regarding the impact of legume intake on cardiometabolic health. The most influential cultures or cuisines for legume consumption were Mexican (31.4%) and Indian (25.8%).

Conclusion

Promotion of legume consumption should focus on their health benefits, affordability, and environmental sustainability attributes. Collaboration between key stakeholders (legume advocacy groups, consumers, food industry) could help drive legume product innovations to extend the range available to consumers.

Summary

• Survey respondents report the affordability and health benefits associated with legumes as the main reasons for consumption.

• Promotion of legume consumption should therefore focus on health and affordability, as well as via education regarding their low environmental impact.

• New legume product innovations (driven by collaboration between key stakeholders) could extend the range of legume foods available to consumers, in turn promoting increased consumption.

1. Introduction

Legumes, from the Fabaceae family (also known as the Leguminosae family), are the nutritious pods or fruits of leguminous plants [1, 2]. They include pulses (e.g., lentils, chickpeas, kidney beans), green beans, peas, soybeans and peanuts [2]. Though nutrient composition varies by type, legumes are rich in plant protein, slow‐release carbohydrates, dietary fibre, several B‐group vitamins, and minerals such as iron and zinc [3]. Globally, legume consumption is recommended within national dietary guidelines, and recommendations for legume consumption vary from ‘at least once per week’ to ‘up to 400 g per day’ [3, 4, 5, 6]. In the 2013 Australian Dietary Guidelines (ADGs), legumes are a plant‐based food recommended for intake in both the vegetables food group (one serve is half a cup or 75 g cooked legumes) and the meats and alternatives food group (one serve is one cup or 150 g cooked legumes) [7].

Regular consumption of legumes has been associated with a range of health benefits. A meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials investigating legume consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) found small reductions in total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol [8]. When consumed as part of a plant‐based dietary pattern, defined as higher consumption of plant‐based foods (i.e., more fruits, vegetables, fungi, nuts, seeds) and lower consumption or exclusion of animal‐based foods (i.e., less or no meats, fish/seafood, milk, cheese, butter, cream) [9], legumes have been shown to contribute to reduced CVD risk [9]. Legume consumption has also been associated with improved body weight management due to their energy‐regulating mechanisms, including promoting satiety [10]. Systematic reviews report improved glycaemic control and a reduced risk of type 2 diabetes with plant‐based dietary patterns that include regular legume consumption [11, 12]. Legumes also play a role in supporting gastrointestinal health and lowering the risk of developing colorectal cancer [12, 13].

Despite these documented health benefits, legume consumption remains below recommended levels in many countries globally, based on a review of Food‐Based Dietary Guidelines and intake estimates from the Global Dietary Database [3]. Countries reporting the lowest intake of legumes include Norway (1.2 g/day), Switzerland (2.9 g/day) and Poland (3.0 g/day), while the highest reported intakes are in Afghanistan (122.7 g/day), Vietnam (104.7 g/day) and Sri Lanka (89.6 g/day). In Australia, median legume intake is reported to be 26.1 g/day, which is less than one serve as defined in the 2013 ADGs [3, 7]. However, these intake figures should be interpreted in the context of a number of methodological limitations reported by Hughes et al. [3]. Dietary guidelines worldwide recommend varying amounts of legumes, ranging from two serves per week to two serves per day, with a half cup of cooked legumes being the most common serve size. Despite evidence that legume intake of 50 g/day reduces CVD and all‐cause mortality, many populations globally fall short of this target [3, 14, 15].

A lower consumption of legumes may be partly explained by barriers to intake, such as lack of knowledge, the belief that family members would not eat legumes (such as children disliking legumes, leading to less frequent preparation of legume‐containing meals), and concerns regarding flatulence, although research indicates these concerns may be exaggerated and that flatulence varies depending on regular consumption, legume type and the level of processing [16, 17, 18]. A 2019 Australian study reported similar barriers, including taste, limited knowledge of legume preparation, and family food preferences [19]. Conversely, a 2023 study in Puerto Rico reported that positive perceptions of legumes, particularly regarding taste and health benefits, are associated with higher intake among adults [20]. Food systems are dynamic, with supermarket product ranges changing frequently and global events like the COVID‐19 pandemic accelerating these shifts [21]. Therefore, ongoing monitoring of legume consumption is essential to identify trends over time.

The aim of this study is to explore legume consumption and culinary use of legumes in a convenience sample of Australians, and explore knowledge, perceptions, as well as enablers and barriers to legume intake. A secondary aim of this study is to identify trends and differences in legume consumption, perceptions and culinary use between the current study and a similar 2019 study in Australia.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

An open, self‐administered online survey was conducted using Qualtrics XM (2025), hosted at the University of Wollongong, to investigate knowledge, perceptions and consumption of legumes among Australian consumers. Survey responses were voluntary and anonymous, and respondents could complete the survey only once. Informed tacit consent was provided by respondents. Survey data were stored in Qualtrics. Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Wollongong Human Research Ethics Committee (2024/331). Survey outcomes were reported following the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E‐Surveys (CHERRIES) [22] (Supporting Information S1).

Eligible respondents to the online survey were adults (aged 18 years or older) living in Australia who had not received formal nutrition training. The development of survey questions was informed by a similar 2019 Australian study [19] and the guidelines of Dillman et al. [23]. Briefly, the survey collected responses about respondent demographics, knowledge and perceptions of legumes, legume consumption and culinary use. The online survey was piloted with six consumers, and adjustments to the survey questions and design were made prior to dissemination based on the feedback. Respondents could opt in to a prize draw for supermarket vouchers by providing their contact details in a separate form after completing the survey.

2.2. Data Collection

The online survey collected responses about respondent demographics, knowledge of legumes, perceptions regarding legume consumption and human health, intake of legumes, and the purchasing and preparation of legumes. The final survey is provided as Supporting Information S2. A maximum of 32 questions was distributed over 30 pages. Each page displayed either one or two questions. The survey utilised closed and open‐ended non‐randomised questions. Closed questions included multiple‐choice questions (both ‘select one answer only’ and ‘select all that apply’), 5‐point Likert scales, 10‐point sliding bars, and ranking questions. Open‐ended questions were included where it was not appropriate to use a closed question (e.g., ‘What cultures or cuisines might influence your legume eating habits?’), and to allow respondents to elaborate on their answers to a previous closed question (e.g., ‘Why do you follow this diet?’).

Respondents were recruited to the online survey using social media (including Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn), the Grains and Legumes Nutrition Council e‐newsletter and by snowballing and word‐of‐mouth. The survey was open from 26th February to 15th June 2025. Following the closure of the original Qualtrics account to accommodate an account transition, all responses collected via the initial link were exported and analysed. A second Qualtrics account was then established on 29 April, and the identical survey was re‐issued under a new link to continue data collection. The first page of the survey included an invitation to complete the survey, a link to view the Participant Information Sheet (Supporting Information S3), the research aim, and statements of the voluntary and anonymous nature of the survey (including that respondents could withdraw from the survey at any stage). The following eligibility criteria needed to be confirmed prior to progressing to the first question of the survey: respondents were aged 18 years or older, living in Australia, and had no formal education or training in nutrition or dietetics.

Most survey questions were optional to allow respondents to skip questions if desired. Responses were mandatory for questions that utilised branching logic, such as ‘Do you consume legumes?’. Respondents were able to return to previous pages and questions. A response of ‘Not sure’ was included for closed questions where appropriate. Features included in Qualtrics prevented respondents from completing the online survey multiple times. As a strategy for identifying potentially fraudulent responses, IP addresses were collected for each record.

2.3. Data Analysis

Partially completed survey records were included in the analysis. Imputation was not used for missing data. Records which did not progress past the demographic question block were excluded from analyses (labelled ‘incomplete’). Data cleaning and analysis were conducted using Microsoft Excel (version 16.54). Data were not adjusted for the non‐representative sample.

Descriptive statistics (frequencies and proportions) were used to summarise responses to closed questions. Open‐ended question responses were subjected to content analysis and were summarised into categories based on similar meaning. For example, for the question ‘What are the main reasons you do not eat legumes?’, responses such as ‘I find the taste bland’ and ‘I don't like the taste’ were coded into the category ‘Dislike taste’. Data are presented as a proportion of respondents who completed each individual question.

3. Results

A total of 629 records were collected: 521 from the initial link and 108 from the second link. Following data cleaning and checking for bot responses, 176 (28.0%) records were identified as completed by bots, and a further 91 (14.5%) records were ineligible due to living in a location outside of Australia. Thirteen (2.1%) records were incomplete. Therefore, 349 (55.5%) records were considered valid and included in analyses. The completion rate was 86.2% (542 respondents who submitted the last page out of 629 total records). However, it should be noted that a portion of those who submitted the last page were identified as bots. Of the 349 valid records, the completion rate was 84.2% (294 respondents who submitted the last page out of 349 valid records).

Survey respondents were predominantly older (56 years or more), female and well‐educated, with many retired (Table 1). More than half of respondents reported they did not follow any specific diet (66.5%). Nineteen respondents (5.4%) reported following a vegan diet, while 23 (6.6%) reported following a vegetarian diet and 25 (7.2%) reported following a pesco‐vegetarian diet. Most respondents were the main person in their household to purchase groceries/food (87.7%) and cook it (82.8%).

Table 1.

Demographic characteristics of n = 349 respondents.^*

	n (%)
Age (years)
18–25	35 (10.0)
26–35	34 (9.7)
36–45	22 (6.3)
46–55	66 (18.9)
56–65	84 (24.1)
66 or older	108 (31.0)
Gender
Male	52 (14.9)
Female	296 (84.8)
Prefer not to say	1 (0.3)
Employment status
Employed (full‐time)	107 (30.7)
Employed (part‐time)	81 (23.2)
Not employed	17 (4.9)
Retired	114 (32.7)
Student	30 (8.6)
Highest level of education (n = 346)
Some high school	15 (4.3)
Completed high school	44 (12.7)
Certificate or diploma	100 (28.9)
Bachelor degree	130 (37.6)
Master's degree/PhD	57 (16.5)

^* n = 349 respondents for questions regarding age, gender, and employment status.

3.1. Knowledge and Perceptions of Legumes

Of the 344 respondents who answered the question, ‘Legumes can be known by a few different names. Which of the following are legumes? Select all that apply’, more than 90% selected ‘lentils’ and ‘beans’. More than 80% of respondents selected ‘pulses’ and ‘baked beans’, and more than 70% selected ‘peas’. Tofu, nuts (particularly peanuts), seeds and lupins were also identified (Figure 1). Open‐text responses to ‘Other (please specify)’ can be found in Supporting Information S4.

Figure 1.

Proportions (%) of respondents (n = 344) who selected foods they consider to be legumes.

A total of 94.6% of respondents either ‘somewhat’ agreed or ‘strongly’ agreed with the statement ‘Eating legumes provides you with fibre’. Further, 93.4% either ‘somewhat’ or ‘strongly’ agreed that ‘Eating legumes provides you with a good source of protein’. The statements that received the least agreement were ‘Eating legumes helps lower blood cholesterol levels’ (with 74.5% of respondents choosing either ‘somewhat agree’ or ‘strongly agree’) and ‘Eating legumes helps control blood sugar levels’ (with 78.1% of respondents choosing either ‘somewhat agree’ or ‘strongly agree’). These two statements also received the most ‘neither agree nor disagree’ responses (22.1% and 17.6%, respectively). Some disagreement was observed regarding legumes as a good vegetarian option and their role in digestion, though many respondents (> 80%) reported agreement (Figure 2). Other perceptions captured from an open‐ended question include they are tasty (n = 5), versatile (n = 3) and cost‐effective (n = 3).

Figure 2.

Proportions (%) of respondents (n = 335) who agree or disagree with statements around legume intake.

3.2. Legume Intake

Of the 336 respondents who answered the question ‘Do you consume legumes?’, 97.9% (n = 329) responded ‘Yes’. More than a quarter of respondents (27.2%) reported legume consumption three to four times per week, with a further 24.5% reporting a consumption of one to two times per week. Seventy‐seven respondents reported eating one metric cup of legumes at each sitting, while 75 reported consuming half a cup. Another 17 respondents reported consuming between a half cup and a full cup of legumes per sitting. Regarding the types of legumes being consumed, chickpeas (78.1%), beans (69.5%), peas (67.3%) and lentils (67.0%) were the most frequently selected options (Figure 3). Half of the respondents (54.6%) think of legumes as both a vegetable and a meat alternative, while 22.4% consider legumes to be a vegetable, 21.2% consider legumes to be an alternative to meat.

Figure 3.

Proportions (%) of respondents (n = 315) who report types of legumes they consume.

When prompted to rank nine statements regarding the reasons for consuming legumes, ‘Legumes are nutritious and healthy’ was ranked in either position 1 or 2 (1 = ‘most important’; 9 = ‘least important’) by 78.4% of respondents. The statement ‘Legumes are a cheap and affordable food’ was ranked in positions 1 or 2 by 45.3% of respondents. Statements ranked as the ‘least important’ (in position 8 or 9) were ‘Legumes are part of my traditional diet, or I grew up eating them’ (51.2%) and ‘Legumes are an alternative meat product’ (46.7%). Seven (2.1%) out of 336 respondents reported not consuming legumes, with barriers to consumption being digestive issues and disliking the taste and/or texture of legumes. One respondent specifically identified bloating as a barrier to consumption. ‘Legumes are environmentally friendly and a sustainable food’ was ranked as either third, fourth or fifth most important by 59.2% of respondents, highlighting that sustainability was not a top priority when choosing to consume legumes.

3.3. Culinary Use of Legumes

Most respondents (92.0%) reported purchasing their legume foods from supermarkets, followed by Asian/Indian grocers (20.6%), health food stores (16.6%) and European/continental grocers (13.0%). Respondents typically purchased legumes as canned (88.7%) or dried legumes (69.1%), though a variety of forms were reported (Figure 4). Cost (59.4%) and Australian origin (44.8%) were ranked as the most important factors when purchasing legumes, while the Health Star Rating was least important; some respondents also mentioned organic (n = 5) and product quality (n = 4) as important factors.

Figure 4.

Proportions (%) of respondents (n = 301) who report purchasing various forms of legumes and legume foods.

In an open‐ended question exploring cultures or cuisines that influence legume intake, respondents identified Mexican (89 of 283 respondents; 31.4%), followed by Indian (73 of 283 respondents; 25.8%), as the most influential. When asked about recipes or meals prepared using legumes, responses aligned with these two cuisines (e.g., nachos, chilli con carne, curries, dahl). Vietnamese and Chinese cuisines were also identified (e.g., Chinese stir fry, Vietnamese dishes). However, there was an abundance of other responses, including baked beans, spaghetti bolognese, soups, salads, hummus, and vegetarian meals. Respondents were asked to rank four statements from 0 = ‘disagree’ to 10 = ‘strongly agree’ (5 = ‘somewhat agree’). Many respondents ‘strongly agreed’ (positions 8, 9 or 10) with the statements ‘I know how to prepare and cook legumes’ (65.9%) and ‘I find legumes easy to prepare and cook’ (65.9%). Respondents ‘disagreed’ (positions 0, 1 or 2) with the statements ‘It takes too long to prepare and cook legumes’ (49.0%) and ‘I don't know how to prepare and cook legumes’ (66.7%).

4. Discussion

Our study offers insights from a comprehensive online survey examining consumption patterns, knowledge, and culinary use of legumes in Australia, and highlights enablers and barriers to legume inclusion in the diet. Overall, the survey indicates that a convenience sample of Australian consumers (84.8% female; 55.1% aged 56 years or older; 54.1% Bachelor's degree or higher) include legumes in their diets, in varying amounts, hold positive attitudes towards them, particularly for their perceived health benefits, and show interest in exploring culinary applications.

Legumes are classified within the ADGs as foods in both the vegetable and meat alternatives groups [7], reflecting their rich nutrient profile and versatility in Australian diets. Over half of the consumers in this study considered legumes as both a vegetable and a meat alternative, while others classified them exclusively as one or the other, highlighting potential confusion around their dual role in dietary guidelines. In dietary guidelines from around the world, legumes are represented within ‘protein’ or ‘vegetable’ categories, with some countries featuring them as a preferred protein source. For example, Canada's Food Guide categorises legumes in its ‘protein foods’ group and encourages consumers to ‘choose protein foods that come from plants every day’ [24], while the Nordic Nutrition Recommendations explicitly advocate for plant proteins as a significant component of healthy and sustainable diets [25]. These classifications are supported by strong evidence of the role of legume consumption in promoting health, including weight management and reducing the risk of non‐communicable diseases such as CVD, type 2 diabetes, and certain cancers [26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32].

With the global shift toward plant‐based eating patterns [33], the demand for accessible plant protein sources is increasing [34]. International modelling studies and dietary guidelines have highlighted the health and environmental advantages of replacing animal‐derived proteins with plant‐based alternatives [4, 35]. Within this context, legumes play a central role as a nutrient‐dense, affordable and sustainable protein source [36, 37, 38]. The present study reflects this broader narrative, with most participants recognising legumes as a good source of fibre and protein, indicating strong awareness of their core nutritional attributes. However, fewer consumers agreed that legumes assist in lowering blood cholesterol or controlling blood sugar, with these statements attracting the highest proportion of neutral responses. This suggests that while general health benefits are understood, knowledge of specific cardiometabolic effects is less widespread, despite evidence that legumes' soluble fibre is involved in mechanisms that reduce LDL cholesterol and their low glycaemic index and protein content support blood glucose control, contributing to reduced risk of CVD and type 2 diabetes [1]. Overall, though, there is alignment between consumer perceptions and established evidence to support positioning legumes as key contributors to healthy plant‐based diets.

While consumers may understand the health benefits of legumes and their role as both vegetables and meat alternatives, this knowledge alone does not guarantee optimal intake. Recognising which foods are classified as legumes is equally critical, as misconceptions can influence food choices and limit variety. The survey revealed strong recognition of common legumes (lentils, beans, pulses and baked beans), while peas were identified by more than 70% of respondents. However, confusion was evident for tofu, nuts, and seeds, of which the latter two are not legumes. Only a few respondents correctly identified peanuts and lupins as legumes. In the survey, recognition of legumes was assessed in Question 13. One response option grouped peanuts within a broader ‘nuts’ category and listed them alongside tree nuts such as almonds, cashews and hazelnuts, potentially introducing ambiguity. It appears that some respondents who recognised peanuts as legumes may have used the ‘other’ response option to provide reasoning. However, it is also plausible that other respondents who differentiate peanuts from tree nuts did not select the ‘other’ option for several reasons. First, grouping peanuts with almonds, cashews, and hazelnuts may have created ambiguity about whether the item was intended to assess botanical classification or common culinary groupings. Second, respondents may have selected the closest available response option without further elaboration when no option fully aligned with their understanding, consistent with satisficing behaviour in survey responses [39]. Third, the presentation of peanuts within a broader ‘nuts’ category may have reduced respondents' inclination to provide additional clarification, particularly if the discrepancy was perceived as minor or if challenging the predefined categories seemed unnecessary. These factors may have influenced response patterns and should be considered when interpreting findings related to respondents' recognition of peanuts as legumes. Overall, these findings highlight potential gaps in food literacy regarding legume classification, which may influence dietary choices and the ability to meet recommendations. Misunderstanding what constitutes a legume could limit the variety and frequency of consumption, as individuals may overlook nutrient‐rich options or substitute them with non‐legume foods. Improving food literacy through clear messaging in dietary guidelines, education campaigns, and product/retail labelling is essential to help consumers correctly identify legumes and incorporate them into meals. Strategies could include visual resources, culturally relevant examples, and practical cooking demonstrations to reinforce the health benefits and versatility of legumes. Building on the global positioning of legumes within dietary guidelines and consumer recognition of leguminous foods, it is important to consider how dietary recommendations translate into consumption patterns.

Beyond consumption patterns, understanding where and how consumers source legumes provides further insight into accessibility and market influences on intake. The majority of respondents reported purchasing legumes for use at home from supermarkets, with canned varieties being the most commonly purchased products. Among the different types of legumes consumed, chickpeas emerged as the most frequently used, followed by beans (e.g., kidney beans, soybeans), reflecting their versatility and widespread incorporation into both traditional and contemporary dishes. Legumes have been increasingly incorporated into new product formulations due to their favourable nutritional profile, functional properties, and alignment with emerging consumer and industry trends [40]. In addition, the rise of plant‐based eating, driven by health, environmental, and ethical motivations, has accelerated interest in legumes as a sustainable protein source. Collectively, these factors have contributed to the growing use of legumes in innovative food formulations aimed at meeting consumer demand for nutritious, affordable, and environmentally responsible products. These trends were evident in a 2024 supermarket audit of plant‐based snack products, which identified 696 items across the category. Eighteen different types of legumes were used within these products, demonstrating substantial diversity in ingredient application. Chickpeas dominated the market, accounting for 53% of all legume‐based snacks, followed by green peas at 14% [41]. This strong representation of chickpeas highlights their versatility, widespread consumer acceptance, and functional suitability in snack product development.

While intake patterns and purchasing habits offer a snapshot of current behaviours, exploring the underlying drivers of these choices is critical. Motivations for consumption were primarily health and nutrition benefits, alongside affordability, consistent with broader consumer research indicating that legumes are increasingly valued for their nutrient density, fibre content, and versatility [17]. The 2024 Healthylife Living Healthy Report highlighted legumes as a valuable protein source and cheaper than many meat/animal proteins, costing approximately 50 cents per serve compared to $1.23 for meat alternatives [42]. In addition to their low cost per serve, legumes offer the practical advantage of increasing meal volume, enabling meals to stretch further and reduce overall household food expenditure. These findings highlight the need for clear consumer messaging that emphasises the versatility of legumes, practical guidance on portion sizes, and their role in achieving recommended serves from multiple food groups, while leveraging health and affordability as key motivators to support increased and consistent intake. Conversely, cultural familiarity and legumes' role as a meat alternative were least influential, suggesting that promoting legumes solely as a traditional food or meat substitute may have limited impact. The low environmental impact of legumes was not identified by respondents as a primary driver for consumption; it was perceived as a secondary motivator behind health benefits, nutrition and affordability. Elsewhere in the literature, the favourable sustainability attributes of legumes have also been reported as secondary drivers [43, 44, 45]. This presents an opportunity to educate and guide consumers toward choosing foods (such as legumes) that have a lower environmental impact. Strategies to increase consumer consumption should leverage these motivators by highlighting nutritional benefits, cost‐effectiveness, and practical ways to incorporate legumes into everyday meals.

Among the barriers to legume consumption, gastrointestinal concerns, such as bloating and flatulence, have previously been cited [18]; however, these did not emerge as significant concerns in the present survey, except for non‐consumers (only 2.1%). In fact, many participants perceived legumes as beneficial for gut health, noting that regular consumption supports digestion and improves bowel movements. Despite these positive perceptions, misconceptions persist more broadly in society, with many people associating legume consumption with discomfort or digestive intolerance [18]. Such concerns are often related to infrequent exposure, irregular consumption or poor preparation methods, rather than the inherent properties of legumes themselves [46, 47]. Research indicates that gradual increases in legume intake, combined with appropriate preparation techniques, such as soaking dried legumes and discarding the soaked water, or thoroughly rinsing canned legumes, can minimise gastrointestinal symptoms [48]. Public health messaging should emphasise evidence‐based preparation strategies and provide simple practical guidance, such as soaking, rinsing and cooking, to reduce perceived digestive barriers and encourage regular legume consumption.

Legumes have been a staple in traditional cuisines worldwide for millennia, making it important to explore the cultural and culinary influences on legume intake. Survey findings indicate that Mexican and Indian cuisines were most frequently cited as influencing legume intake, with recipes such as nachos, chilli con carne, curries, and dahl commonly prepared. Other responses included baked beans, bolognese, soups, salads, hummus, and vegetarian meals, reflecting both traditional and mainstream Australian eating habits. These patterns highlight the versatility of legumes as adaptable ingredients that can complement diverse flavours, textures, and cooking styles. Leveraging the popularity of Mexican and Indian dishes through recipe resources, social media, retail campaigns, and food service initiatives could help normalise and increase legume use. Importantly, there is scope to broaden this approach to include other culturally significant cuisines within Australia's multicultural context, such as Mediterranean diets that feature dishes like minestrone, gigantes plaki, and lentil salads, which traditionally incorporate legumes. Middle Eastern cuisines were less frequently identified in the present study compared to the 2019 survey [19], possibly reflecting sample differences. Culinary skills and recipe development play a prominent role in promoting legume consumption [49], reinforcing the need for public health campaigns that prioritise culturally relevant recipes and practical cooking education. Initiatives such as cooking demonstrations, skill‐building programs, and accessible recipe resources are crucial for empowering consumers to confidently and consistently incorporate legumes into everyday meals.

There are several strengths to our study. The survey was advertised online, making it accessible nationwide and recruiting respondents from around Australia. A pilot test of the survey aligned with robust methodology, checking for content and face validity and amending according to feedback prior to advertisement. Survey outcomes have been reported following the CHERRIES checklist. However, there are some limitations that need to be acknowledged. Respondents were likely to be interested in and enjoy consuming legumes, resulting in voluntary response bias. A small proportion of our sample reported no legume consumption. Therefore, the findings of our study need to be interpreted with caution. Respondents were predominantly older, female, retired, and well‐educated, which limits generalisability and precludes adequately powered subgroup comparisons across age, education, and knowledge domains. Further, the term ‘formal nutrition education’ was not defined for participants, which may have led to varied interpretations of this survey item. In a multiple‐choice question (Question 13), peanuts and tree nuts were listed together, which may have led to misresponses from respondents who wished to identify peanuts, but not tree nuts, as legumes. Data are self‐reported, and responses to survey questions may not truly reflect behaviour (e.g., regarding intake). Not all respondents completed every question in the survey. However, non‐responses were excluded from analyses of each individual question. Finally, this survey was infiltrated by bots, though considerable effort was made to reduce this. Advice from the literature [50, 51, 52, 53] and criteria previously published by the authors [54] guided the approaches used in this study to prevent and remove bot responses. Strategies used in this study included, but were not limited to, collecting IP addresses and checking individual survey records for nonsense or duplicate responses.

5. Conclusion

Our study provides insights into current legume intake, perceptions of legume consumption, and culinary use of legumes in a convenience sample of Australian consumers. Consumers who participated in this study reported consuming legumes regularly. The primary motivators for consumption were perceived health‐promoting effects and affordability of legumes, while cultural familiarity and ‘legumes as a meat alternative’ were least influential. Sustainability attributes of legumes were not a top priority for consumers. Health‐focused messaging, affordability and environmental sustainability should therefore form the basis of campaigns promoting legumes to consumers. Specific education on practical ways to incorporate legumes into everyday meals, including preparation techniques to improve acceptability, should be considered in initiatives. Strategic partnerships between legume advocacy groups, academia, consumers, health professionals (dietitians and nutritionists), professional nutrition and medical peak bodies, industry, non‐government organisations (including environmental groups), and relevant government sectors (including food regulation and agriculture) could help to drive more food product innovations to extend the product range available to consumers. Food manufacturers interested in new product development could diversify the range of appealing legume‐based options available to consumers, including legume milks, legume‐enriched pastas, snacks, and fermented legume products. They could also leverage emerging culinary applications, for example, the use of aquafaba as a functional ingredient to extend the product range.

Author Contributions

Cassandra J. Nikodijevic, Theresa Pham and Anita Stefoska‐Needham formulated the research question and designed the study. Cassandra J. Nikodijevic and Anita Stefoska‐Needham conducted the research. Cassandra J. Nikodijevic analysed the data. Cassandra J. Nikodijevic, Theresa Pham and Anita Stefoska‐Needham drafted the manuscript. Anita Stefoska‐Needham and Kathy La Macchia provided critical revision of the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the submitted version of this manuscript.

Ethics Statement

Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Wollongong Human Research Ethics Committee (2024/331).

Conflicts of Interest

Cassandra J. Nikodijevic received financial support from the Grains and Legumes Nutrition Council to conduct this research. Grains and Legumes Nutrition Council was not involved in the conduct, analysis or interpretation of this research and research findings. Theresa Pham and Kathy La Macchia are employed by the Grains and Legumes Nutrition Council. The other author declares no conflicts of interest.

Supporting information

Supporting File 1

Supporting File 2

Supporting File 3

Supporting File 4

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.