Living labs were defined to be location-based real-world settings to explore new knowledge. Moreover and not bound to locations, living labs are associated with participatory methods. In food-related consumer behavior research, participation is a trend, which is however still in the development phase. A literature search on Scopus in 2019 revealed that conference papers and articles in the research field referring to participatory methods, a number of 956, made ~0.1% of the total food-related consumer behavior literature. Four main streams of participatory methods were identified: citizen science, crowd science, photovoice and community-based participatory research (Onwezen et al., 2021). To figure out how the “participation trend” has evolved since 2019, the search string developed by Onwezen et al. (2021) was applied using Scopus. On 15.03.2022, 1'854 conference papers and articles resulted from the literature search, which is ~0.15% of the food-related consumer behavior literature. Thus, the participation trend has continued. Inserting solely the term "living lab" in the methods-related query of the search string, to determine to what extent and related to which methods living labs are represented in the food-related consumer behavior literature, yielded 43 search results. Many of the studies apply a mixed-methods approach, but qualitative methods prevail (e.g., workshops, focus groups, interviews and observations). However, quantitative research methods are also applied. Example studies include interventions in a real-world setting and the analysis of sales data, a choice task in an experimental restaurant with a survey thereafter, and the collaboration with households. Living labs were also utilized to initiate self-monitoring of dietary behaviors. In view of the manifold possibilities, a critical reflection on the trade-offs associated with different degrees of participation and different methods, such as cost-effectiveness versus involvement and data quality versus data richness, is needed.