Jacobs Tyler P, Wang Meiying, Leach Stefan, Siu Ho Loong, Khanna Mahika, Chan Ka Wan, Chau Ho Ting, Tam Katy Y Y, Feldman Gilad
Department of Psychology, Swarthmore College, USA.
Department of Marketing, London Business School, UK.
Int Rev Soc Psychol. 2024 Apr 26;37:6. doi: 10.5334/irsp.932. eCollection 2024.
Bastian et al. (2012) argued that the meat paradox-caring for animals yet eating them-creates a tension between people's moral standards (caring for animals) and their behavior (eating them) that can be resolved via mechanisms of motivated moral disengagement. One disengagement mechanism that is thought to play a central role is the denial of food-animal minds and therefore their status as moral patients. This idea has garnered substantial interest and has framed much of the psychological approach to meat consumption. We subjected Studies 1 and 2 of Bastian et al. (2012) to high-powered direct replications and found support for the target article's hypotheses, concluding a successful replication. Perceptions of animals' minds were negatively related to their perceived edibility (original: = -.42 [-.67, -.08]; replication: = -.45 [-.69, -.12]), positively related to moral concern for them (original: = .77 [.58, .88]); replication: = .83 [.68, .91]) and positively related to negative affect related to eating them (original: .80 [.63, .90]; replication: = .80 [.62, .90]). Learning that an animal will be used for food led people to deny its mental capabilities (original: = 0.40 [0.15, 0.65]; replication: = 0.30, 95% CI [0.24, 0.37]), with the affect slightly weaker than the original. Our findings support the idea that the meat paradox is resolved through people's motivated denial of food animals' minds. Materials, data, and code are available on the OSF: https://osf.io/h2pqu/. This Registered Report has been officially endorsed by Peer Community in Registered Reports: https://doi.org/10.24072/pci.rr.100545.
巴斯蒂安等人（2012年）认为，肉类悖论——关爱动物却又食用它们——在人们的道德标准（关爱动物）和行为（食用它们）之间制造了一种紧张关系，这种紧张关系可以通过动机性道德脱离机制来解决。一种被认为起核心作用的脱离机制是否认食用动物具有心智，从而否认它们作为道德受体的地位。这一观点引起了广泛关注，并构成了肉类消费心理学研究方法的重要框架。我们对巴斯蒂安等人（2012年）的研究1和研究2进行了高功效直接复制，并找到了支持目标文章假设的证据，得出了成功复制的结论。对动物心智的认知与它们被感知的可食用性呈负相关（原文：r = -.42 [-0.67, -0.08]；复制研究：r = -.45 [-0.69, -0.12]），与对它们的道德关怀呈正相关（原文：r = 0.77 [0.58, 0.88]；复制研究：r = 0.83 [0.68, 0.91]），与食用它们所产生的负面影响呈正相关（原文：r = 0.80 [0.63, 0.90]；复制研究：r = 0.80 [0.62, 0.90]）。得知一种动物将被用作食物会导致人们否认其心智能力（原文：b = 0.40 [0.15, 0.65]；复制研究：b = 0.30，95%置信区间[0.24, 0.37]），影响程度略低于原文。我们的研究结果支持了这样一种观点，即肉类悖论是通过人们有动机地否认食用动物的心智来解决的。材料、数据和代码可在开放科学框架（OSF）上获取：https://osf.io/h2pqu/。本预注册报告已得到预注册报告同行社区的正式认可：https://doi.org/10.24072/pci.rr.100545。
