Department of Psychology, University of Bradford, UK.
School of Psychology, Keele University, UK.
Appetite. 2023 Nov 1;190:107024. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2023.107024. Epub 2023 Sep 4.
A largescale shift towards plant-based diets is considered a critical requirement for tackling ethical, environmental, and global health issues associated with animal food production and consumption. Although previous research has identified psychological strategies that enable meat-eaters to justify and continue meat consumption and feel less morally conflicted about it, research on the psychological strategies that enable consumers to continue dairy, egg, and fish consumption is scarce. We conducted an online survey study using an adjusted version of the Meat-Eating Justification Scale to investigate the use of psychological strategies to cope with cognitive dissonance related to meat, dairy, egg, and fish consumption in omnivores (n = 186), pescatarians (n = 106), vegetarians (n = 143), vegans (n = 203), and flexitarians (n = 63). Results indicated greater use of meat-related dissonance reduction strategies among omnivores as compared to other dietary groups, greater use of fish-related dissonance reduction strategies among fish consumers (omnivores, flexitarians and pescatarians) compared to vegetarians and vegans, and greater use of dairy and egg-related dissonance reduction strategies among dairy and egg consumers (omnivores, flexitarians, pescatarians, and vegetarians) as compared to vegans. This pattern was particularly clear for justifications used to defend animal product consumption, denial of animal suffering, and use of dichotomization when considering meat and fish consumption. These findings highlight the importance of extending the research on dissonance reduction strategies beyond meat consumption and studying the consumption of a range of animal products. This can help in identifying the psychological barriers to adopting a plant-based diet and informing interventions for behaviour change.
大规模转向植物性饮食被认为是解决与动物食品生产和消费相关的伦理、环境和全球健康问题的关键要求。尽管先前的研究已经确定了一些心理策略，可以使肉食者为自己的肉食消费行为辩护并继续消费，同时减少道德冲突，但对于能够使消费者继续消费奶制品、蛋类和鱼类的心理策略的研究却很少。我们使用经过调整的肉食者合理化量表进行了一项在线调查研究，以调查杂食者（n=186）、鱼素食者（n=106）、素食者（n=143）、严格素食者（n=203）和弹性素食者（n=63）在与肉类、奶制品、蛋类和鱼类消费相关的认知失调中使用心理策略来应对的情况。结果表明，与其他饮食群体相比，杂食者更多地使用与肉类相关的减少失调策略；与素食者和严格素食者相比，鱼类消费者（杂食者、弹性素食者和鱼素食者）更多地使用与鱼类相关的减少失调策略；与严格素食者相比，奶制品和蛋类消费者（杂食者、弹性素食者、鱼素食者和素食者）更多地使用与奶制品和蛋类相关的减少失调策略。这种模式在为动物产品消费辩护、否认动物痛苦以及在考虑肉类和鱼类消费时使用二分法的合理化策略中尤为明显。这些发现强调了将减少失调策略的研究从肉类消费扩展到研究一系列动物产品消费的重要性。这有助于确定采用植物性饮食的心理障碍，并为行为改变干预提供信息。
