Ethical Diet and Lifestyle Projects
Profiles of Animal Advocates and Veg*ans
Inspired by collaboration with Rob Udale at Animal Think Tank, an organization dedicated to advancing animal freedom through nonviolent activism. Working together, we aim to design high-quality research to further their mission of creating long-term cultural shifts toward animal welfare and freedom.
This exploratory study examines subgroups of vegans, vegetarians, animal advocates, and animal sympathizers, focusing on underrepresented individuals. Despite rising global concerns about the environmental and health impacts of meat consumption, societal norms still favor meat-based diets, with only a small percentage identifying as vegan or vegetarian. However, many consumers express concern for animal welfare, suggesting potential for growth within these movements. While previous research has focused on reducing meat consumption and comparing vegans to non-vegans, little attention has been paid to the diversity within these subgroups. This study explores how race, personality traits, political ideologies, and other factors shape motivations and identities within these communities. Using latent class analysis, the research will identify distinct profiles to inform advocacy strategies, enhance social support, and foster more inclusive communities within the animal advocacy movement.
Consumer Attitudes Towards Cultivated Meat: Who Is Likely to Try It and Can This Be Changed Through Functional Matching?
Presented at Society for Personality and Social Psychology’s Annual Convention in San Diego, CA
Although meat consumption contributes to climate change, animal suffering, antibiotic resistance, and several other problems, large segments of the population are unwilling to change their eating habits. Cultivated meat has been proposed as a potential solution to replace meat without sacrificing taste. Despite the potential benefits of this alternative, many questions remain about consumer acceptance. The present study investigated how individual differences and motivations for eating/avoiding meat affect participants’ likelihood of trying cultivated meat. Additionally, the description of the product was manipulated to explore if matching the framing to the consumer’s motivation increased likelihood. Participants took an approximately 6-minute survey that asked about food motivations, likelihood of trying cultivated meat, and measured individual differences. Motivation matching did not significantly increase the likelihood of trying cultivated meat. Most of the individual differences were not significantly related, but men and those higher in masculinity were more likely to try the product. Because this demographic is resistant to other meat substitutes, cultivated meat could provide an alternative for certain groups of people that would otherwise consume traditional meat. Food decisions are difficult to change, so it is possible that these descriptions were not enough to demonstrate significant effects. Further research should devise stronger manipulations for effective advertising surrounding cultivated meat.
