AMBIVALENCE-MOTIVATED MEAT REDUCTION 1
Meating Conflict: Toward a Model of Ambivalence-Motivated Meat Reduction.
Shiva Pauer1
Matthew B. Ruby2
Bastiaan T. Rutjens1
Grischa Perino3
Frenk van Harreveld1,4
1Department of Social Psychology, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
2School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Australia
3Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences, University of Hamburg, Germany
4National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), The Netherlands
Corresponding author:
Shiva Pauer
University of Amsterdam, Department of Social Psychology
Nieuwe Achtergracht 129-B, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Email: [email protected]
Word Count: 6,955 AMBIVALENCE-MOTIVATED MEAT REDUCTION 2
Abstract
An increasing number of people is concerned about the ethics of eating meat despite enjoying doing so. In the present research, we examined whether the desire to resolve this ambivalence about eating meat leads to a reduction in meat consumption. Our model of ambivalence-
motivated meat reduction proposes that the pervasive nature of evaluative conflict motivates
meat avoidance, and we highlight two potential mechanisms involved: the anticipation of
ambivalence reduction through behavioral change, and information seeking aimed at
facilitating behavioral change. Study 1 drew on a 6-day food diary with 7,485 observations in
a relatively representative sample to investigate the predictors of meat-related ambivalence
and demonstrate its correlation with meat reduction. Two experiments showed that ambivalence-induced discomfort motivated participants to eat less meat when they introspected on their incongruent evaluations (Study 2 and 3), which was mediated by the hypothesized process variables (Study 3; preregistered). These findings in diverse samples from Germany, England, and the US (total N = 1,192) indicate that behavioral change is an
important coping strategy to resolve ambivalent discomfort in the context of meat consumption. Our model of ambivalence-motivated meat reduction contributes to theorizing on the consequences of ambivalence and the psychology of (not) eating meat.
Keywords: ambivalence, behavioral change, donation, information-seeking, meat
AMBIVALENCE-MOTIVATED MEAT REDUCTION 3
Data Availability Statement
Data files, Supporting Information, and preregistrations are available at OSF
(https://tinyurl.com/meatingconflict), save the datasets from Study 1, which will be made
accessible once a separate part of the dataset has been published in an unrelated article.
Acknowledgements
Study 3 was funded by the University of Amsterdam. Study 1 was funded by the
Center for a Sustainable University and the Cluster of Excellence 'CliSAP' (EXC177), funded through the German Science Foundation (DFG), both at the University of Hamburg.
Preparation of this manuscript was facilitated by funding from the German Academic
Scholarship Foundation to the first author. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. All authors contributed to and have approved the final manuscript.
ORCID IDs
S.P.: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5965-8040
M.B.R.: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9562-6510
B.T.R.: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3163-4156
G.P.: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6519-1029
F.v.H.: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3717-2773 AMBIVALENCE-MOTIVATED MEAT REDUCTION 4
Meating Conflict: Toward a Model of Ambivalence-Motivated Meat Reduction
Meat consumption is a cherished behavior around the world (OECD & FAO, 2020).
Many people value the nutritional density,