A social identity needs perspective to Veg*nism: Associations between perceived discrimination and well-being among Veg*ns in Turkey

The association between food neophobia, bi-dimensional aspects of orthorexia, and anxiety among vegetarians and omnivores

Vegetarianism is a growing trend, and food neophobia and orthorexia nervosa could act as barriers to achieving a healthy vegetarian diet. The aim of this study is to compare the levels of food neophobia, anxiety, and both healthy and pathological aspects of orthorexia among vegetarians and omnivores. Additionally, the study aims to identify the relationships between food neophobia, anxiety, and orthorexia. In this cross-sectional online survey, a total of 324 vegetarian and 455 omnivores adults participated. The questionnaire consisted of four sections: sociodemographic, lifestyle, and health-related characteristics, the Food Neophobia Scale (FNS), the Teruel Orthorexia Scale (TOS), and the Generalized Anxiety Disorders-7 Scale. Vegetarians exhibited lower FNS scores (p < 0.001) and had higher healthy orthorexic scores (p < 0.001) than omnivores. There were no differences between groups for anxiety scores (p > 0.05). Regression analysis indicated that higher food neophobia (OR: 0.953, 95% CI:0.937-0.968) and TOS-OrNe scores (OR: 0.946, 95% CI: 0.901-0.993) were associated with lower odds of following a vegetarian diet. Conversely, higher TOS-HeOr scores (OR: 1.135, 95% CI:1.096-1.176) were linked to an increased likelihood of adopting a vegetarian diet. Furthermore, both FNS and GAD-7 scores showed negative correlations with TOS-HeOR (r = -0.124, p < 0.001 and r = -0.129 p < 0.001, respectively), and positive correlations with TOS-OrNe (r = 0.106, p < 0.001 and r = 0.146, p < 0.001). In conclusion, vegetarians exhibit lower levels of food neophobia and a greater interest in healthy eating than omnivores. Additionally, the distinct correlation between two dimensions of orthorexia and food neophobia and anxiety provides support for the two-dimensional nature of orthorexia.

Forty-five years of research on vegetarianism and veganism: A systematic and comprehensive literature review of quantitative studies

Meat production and consumption are sources of animal cruelty, responsible for several environmental problems and human health diseases, and contribute to social inequality. Vegetarianism and veganism (VEG) are two alternatives that align with calls for a transition to more ethical, sustainable, and healthier lifestyles. Following the PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic literature review of 307 quantitative studies on VEG (from 1978 to 2023), collected from the Web of Science in the categories of psychology, behavioral science, social science, and consumer behavior. For a holistic view of the literature and to capture its multiple angles, we articulated our objectives by responding to the variables of "WHEN," "WHERE," "WHO," "WHAT," "WHY," "WHICH," and "HOW" (6W1H) regarding the VEG research. Our review highlighted that quantitative research on VEG has experienced exponential growth with an unbalanced geographical focus, accompanied by an increasing richness but also great complexity in the understating of the VEG phenomenon. The systematic literature review found different approaches from which the authors studied VEG while identifying methodological limitations. Additionally, our research provided a systematic view of factors studied on VEG and the variables associated with VEG-related behavior change. Accordingly, this study contributes to the literature in the field of VEG by mapping the most recent trends and gaps in research, clarifying existing findings, and suggesting directions for future research.

The vegan dilemma: Do peaceful protests worsen attitudes to veganism?

A body of research has shown that violent protests reduce support for social movements. However, few studies have examined whether the same is true for protests which are peaceful, yet disruptive (e.g., blocking traffic). Across two pre-registered experimental studies, we explored whether pro-vegan protests that are depicted as causing social disruption lead to more negative attitudes towards veganism, compared to non-disruptive protests or a control condition. Study 1 utilised a combined sample of Australian and United Kingdom residents (N = 449; M_age = 24.7 years). Study 2 employed a larger sample of undergraduate Australian students (N = 934; M_age = 19.8 years). In Study 1, disruptive protests were associated with more negative attitudes towards vegans, but only among women. In Study 2, no such effect was found. Instead, a significant main effect was found for the protest's cause (vegan vs. fast fashion), but not protest type (disruptive vs. non-disruptive). That is, reading about a vegan protest, irrespective of how disruptive it was, led to worse attitudes towards vegans, and greater defense of meat consumption (i.e., endorsement of meat eating as natural, necessary, and normal), than reading about a control protest. This effect was mediated by the perceived immorality of the protestors, and, in turn, reduced identification with them. Taking together both studies, the purported location of the protest (i.e., domestic vs. overseas) did not significantly impact attitudes toward the protestors. The current findings suggest that depictions of vegan protests elicit worse attitudes toward this movement, regardless of how peaceful that protest may be. Future research is needed to examine whether other forms of advocacy can ameliorate negative reactions to vegan activism.

Mediterranean-Style Diet and Other Determinants of Well-Being in Omnivorous, Vegetarian, and Vegan Women

Due to the lack of studies comparing the determinants of well-being in omnivores and vegetarians, we examined associations of socio-demographic and lifestyle factors, including adherence to a Mediterranean-style diet, in relation to well-being in omnivorous, vegetarian, and vegan women. Well-being was assessed using a validated WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Adherence to the Mediterranean-style diet was determined using a modified Mediterranean diet score. The study was conducted on 636 women (23.9 ± 5.7 years), of whom 47.3% were omnivores, 33.2% vegetarians, and 19.5% vegans. The good well-being group (WHO-5 Index ≥ 13 points) comprised 30.9% of the omnivores, 46.0% of the vegetarians, and 57.3% of the vegans. The remaining participants were classified as belonging to the poor well-being group (<13 points). Compared to the omnivores, the vegetarians and vegans had a 1.6-fold (95% CI: 1.04-2.42) and a 2.4-fold (95% CI: 1.45-3.99) higher probability of having good well-being, respectively. In omnivores, the predictors of good well-being were adherence to the Mediterranean-style diet (a 1-score increment was associated with a 17% higher probability of good well-being, P-trend = 0.016), higher self-perceived health status, and lower levels of stress. In vegetarians and vegans, it was older age, higher physical activity (≥3 h/week), 7-8 h sleep time, and similarly to omnivores' higher self-perceived health status and lower stress level. Our findings indicate that following a Mediterranean-style diet was associated with better well-being in omnivores. Furthermore, we identified that different determinants were associated with well-being in omnivorous and vegetarian and vegan women.

Intergroup attitudes between meat-eaters and meat-avoiders: The role of dietary ingroup identification

Why might some meat-eaters and meat-avoiders express negative attitudes toward each other? We investigated intergroup attitudes and potential underpinnings of these attitudes across three different dietary groups—veg*ans (vegetarians and vegans), flexitarians (people who restrict their meat intake partially), and meat-eaters—in Turkey ( NStudy 1 = 366; NStudy 2 = 450). In both studies, veg*ans showed the greatest ingroup favouritism and reported the highest ingroup identification and perceived discrimination. Meat enjoyment, moral consideration, and perceived veg*an threat (among meat-eaters) predicted dietary ingroup identification in Study 1, whereas perceived discrimination towards one’s dietary group was the strongest predictor of identification among all dietary groups in Study 2. Among meat-avoiders, but not among meat-eaters, stronger dietary ingroup identification was associated with more negative outgroup attitudes. Findings are discussed in light of social identity theories and intergroup perspectives.

Beyond the Choice of What You Put in Your Mouth: A Systematic Mapping Review of Veganism and Vegan Identity

In recent years, and in the current climate crisis, the interest in veganism and sustainable diet/lifestyle has increased. This growing interest can also be seen within academia. Therefore, we set out to systematically document and organize the social psychological literature on veganism and vegan identity to identify where the field currently is, and what we need to do next. Following PRISMA guidelines we identified a data set of 26 academic papers published between 2010 and 2021. Through a thematic analysis of the data, we created four categories of study focus and content: (1) vegans as a disadvantaged/stigmatized group, (2) the role of ideology in negative attitudes toward vegans, (3) the role of moral and ethical beliefs in changing or sustaining dietary preferences, and (4) veganism as a social movement and vegan activism. Our analysis emphasizes issues with merging all non-meat eaters, reduction of veganism into dietary or lifestyle choices neglecting the politicized content and movement, lack of processes underlying emergence and endurance of veganism, and decontextualization of vegan identity. What is needed is a more fine-grained exploration that addresses the identified issues to account for the content of vegan identity. This would expand, for example, the motives literature to include and emphasize intersectionality in a vegan identity context. Specifically, to facilitate a more sustainable lifestyle, the content of social dimensions needs to be qualitatively explored.

Why They Eat What They Eat: Comparing 18 Eating Motives Among Omnivores and Veg*ns

While the diets of most people include meat, millions of individuals follow a meat-free diet. But why do people eat what they eat? Here we explored differences and commonalities in the eating motives of omnivores and veg^*ns (i.e., both vegetarians and vegans). Specifically, we compared mean levels and rank order of 18 eating motives in two samples (Study 1: 294 omnivores, 321 veg^*ns; Study 2: 112 omnivores, 622 veg^*ns). We found that omnivores were more motivated than veg^*ns by the eating motives of Traditional Eating and Habits, while veg^*ns were more motivated by Animal Protection and Environmental Protection. Differences among groups in Health were inconsistent across studies. Despite these differences in mean levels, the rank order of the eating motives was very similar: Two of the top four eating motives of both diet groups in both studies were Liking and Health, while Social Norms, Social Image, and Religion were among the four least important motives of both groups. Overall, while we did find differences in the absolute importance of certain motives, we also found striking similarities in the relative importance of eating motives, suggesting that including a wide range of eating motives could be beneficial when examining dietary behaviors.

Differences between Vegetarians and Omnivores in Food Choice Motivation and Dietarian Identity

Vegetarianism is on the rise worldwide and its importance is being emphasized in various ways, such as in its sustainability, environmental, food system, and ethical aspects. The purpose of the study is to identify motivations behind food choices and dietarian identity, to investigate the perceptions about plant-based foods, and to identify differences between vegetarians and omnivores. We conducted an online survey of 245 vegetarians and 246 omnivores. There was a significant difference between vegetarians and omnivores. In food choice motivations, vegetarians scored higher in the factors of ‘ethical concern’, ‘health’, and ‘convenience and price’, while omnivores responded higher in ‘sensory appeal’ and ‘weight control’ factors. In the dietarian identity, vegetarians scored higher in the ‘complex motivation’ and ‘strictness’ factors, while on the other hand omnivores scored higher in ‘out-group regard’ and ‘public regard’ factors. Although the reasons can be different, we confirmed that both vegetarians and omnivores are positive toward plant-based foods. Our results suggest that different strategies will be needed to promote plant-based food consumption to vegetarians and to omnivores.

Dietary behaviour as a form of collective action: A social identity model of vegan activism

Adopting plant-based, or vegan, diets can have a number of benefits, including mitigating climate change, promoting animal welfare, or improving public health. In the current research, we use social psychological theory to better understand what motivates vegans to engage in collective action on behalf of this social group - that is, what motivates individuals to promote, or encourage others to adopt, a vegan lifestyle. We develop and test a Social Identity Model of Vegan Activism, which highlights the roles of individuals' social identities, sense of efficacy, emotions and moral convictions in fostering collective action. In two pre-registered studies, the first with self-identified vegans from Australia and the UK (N = 351), and the second with self-identified vegans from the UK and the US (N = 340), we found that individuals more frequently engaged in vegan activism (i.e., actions to promote vegan lifestyles) when they had stronger moral convictions (i.e., deontological or consequentialist), greater collective efficacy (i.e., beliefs that vegans can make a positive difference), anger (i.e., when thinking about the reasons why they are vegan), and identification (both with vegans, and with animals). Deontological and consequentialist moral convictions had significant indirect effects on vegan activism via different mediators. We conclude by discussing the implications and importance of studying dietary behavior from a social identity perspective, including its ability to help explain how and why individuals become motivated to not only adopt a certain (e.g., vegan) lifestyle themselves, but to also 'act collectively' on behalf of that shared group membership (e.g., promote vegan-friendly behaviors). We also highlight some key insights for policy makers and campaigners aiming to promote plant-based diets.