Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorIoannidou, Maria
dc.contributor.authorLesk, Valerie E.
dc.contributor.authorStewart-Knox, Barbara
dc.contributor.authorFrancis, K.B.
dc.date.accessioned2023-05-16T06:59:33Z
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-09T12:33:56Z
dc.date.available2023-05-16T06:59:33Z
dc.date.available2023-06-09T12:33:56Z
dc.date.issued2023-07
dc.identifier.citationIoannidou M, Lesk VE, Stewart-Knox B et al (2023) Moral Emotions and Justifying Beliefs about Meat, Fish, Dairy and Egg Consumption: A Comparative Study of Dietary Groups. Appetite. 186: 106544.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10454/19447
dc.descriptionYesen_US
dc.description.abstractMeat eaters and meat abstainers differ in their beliefs and moral emotions related to meat consumption alongside gender differences. Few studies have investigated beliefs and moral emotions in pescatarians and vegans. Little is known about differences in moral emotions and beliefs regarding dairy, eggs, and fish or about speciesist beliefs within and between specific dietary groups. To address this gap, we investigated moral emotions (consumption-related disgust and guilt), attitudes towards animals (Animal Attitudes Scale) and justifying beliefs related to meat (Carnism Inventory), dairy, egg, and fish consumption in omnivores (n = 167), pescatarians (n = 110), vegetarians (n = 116), and vegans (n = 149). Results showed that people who consumed animal-derived products reported lower disgust and guilt and held stronger justifying beliefs about consumption of these products, than those who did not consume animal products. All dietary groups significantly differed from each other in their attitudes about using animals for human benefit, with omnivores showing the least positive attitudes towards animals, followed by pescatarians and vegetarians, and with vegans showing the most positive attitudes towards animals. Women experienced greater moral emotions and held fewer justifying beliefs than men within groups where animal products were consumed and this was related to the animal-based products they consume (i.e., fish for pescatarians and eggs/dairy for vegetarians). These findings emphasise the importance of considering a wider range of animal products, and dietary groups in order to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the psychological underpinnings of animal product consumption. The results highlight differences between dietary groups in attitudes and moral concern towards animals, which may be important to consider when designing interventions to reduce animal product consumption.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.rights© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).en_US
dc.subjectFood choiceen_US
dc.subjectVegetarianen_US
dc.subjectVeganen_US
dc.subjectOmnivoreen_US
dc.subjectPescatarianen_US
dc.subjectMoral emotionen_US
dc.subjectDisgusten_US
dc.subjectGuilten_US
dc.subjectCarnistic beliefsen_US
dc.titleMoral Emotions and Justifying Beliefs about Meat, Fish, Dairy and Egg Consumption: A Comparative Study of Dietary Groupsen_US
dc.status.refereedYesen_US
dc.date.Accepted2023-03-18
dc.date.application2023-03-23
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.type.versionPublished versionen_US
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2023.106544
dc.rights.licenseCC-BYen_US
dc.date.updated2023-05-16T06:59:35Z
refterms.dateFOA2023-06-09T12:34:40Z
dc.openaccess.statusopenAccessen_US


Item file(s)

Thumbnail
Name:
Appetitepaper23(2).pdf
Size:
2.322Mb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Published version

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record