Tensions within and between vegans and vegetarians: Meat-free motivations matter

Social impediments to meat-eaters' adherence to critical calls for a meat-free diet: An experimental test of social norm and message source effects

Reducing meat consumption is highly effective for reducing personal carbon emissions, yet most people in Western nations still eat meat. We build on recent research highlighting that group boundaries may impede dietary change by (a) promoting pro-meat norms and (b) prohibiting critical calls for a veg* diet (vegetarian and vegan, i.e., meat-free). Past research relied on self-reports and behavioural measures of engagement, leaving open whether these effects extend to food consumption settings and ad-hoc meal choice. We conducted two pre-registered experiments in which meat-eaters read critical calls to adopt a veg* diet, either by a vegan (outgroup) or a meat-eater (ingroup). In Experiment 2, participants moreover read an article either highlighting a veg* or a meat-eating norm. We then assessed actual (Experiment 1) or hypothetical (Experiment 2) meal choice as dependent variables. As predicted, intergroup criticism (i.e., voiced by veg*s) consistently led to message rejection in comparison to the same criticism voiced by meat eaters, but we did not observe effects on meal choice. Norms neither had a main nor interaction effect on self-reports and behaviour. We discuss potential intermediary processes between engagement with and adoption of a vegan diet and derive evidence-based recommendations for constructive communication across group boundaries.

Adoption of a Short-Term (4-Week) Vegan Diet as Part of 'Veganuary' Significantly Reduces Saturated Fatty Acid (SFA), Cholesterol, B12, and Iodine Intake in Omnivorous Individuals-An Observational Study

Global veganism campaigns like 'Veganuary' have gained popularity. We conducted an observational study to assess the impact of a 4-week vegan diet during 'Veganuary' on nutrient intake, status, knowledge, and motivations for veganism. Data were collected before and after 'Veganuary', using Food Frequency Questionnaires (FFQs) to estimate dietary intake. Micronutrient knowledge and motivation were assessed through questionnaires. A total of 154 UK adults aged 18-60 years (2019: n81; 2020: n73) participated. Groups were vegetarians and omnivores committed to a 4-week vegan diet during 'Veganuary'. Control groups were vegans and omnivores who did not transition. Short-term vegan diets significantly decreased intake of iodine, B12, cholesterol, and saturated fatty acids (SFAs) in omnivores. Micronutrient knowledge was low, and motivation for veganism varied. Short-term vegan diets reduce macro- and micronutrient intake in omnivores. Veganuary participants could benefit from nutritional guidance or supplementation. Attention is required for UK micronutrient intake and knowledge. Motivations for vegan pledges may influence diets, warranting further research.

Plant-based meat analogs and fat substitutes, structuring technology and protein digestion: A review

There is currently an increasing trend in the consumption of meat analogs and fat substitutes due to the health hazards by excessive consumption of meat. Simulating the texture and mouthfeel of meat through structured plant-derived polymers has become a popular processing method. In this review, the mechanical structuring technology of plant polymers for completely replacing real meat is mainly introduced in this review, which mainly focuses on the parameters and principles of mechanical equipment for the production of vegan meat. The difference in composition between plant meat and real meat is mainly reflected in the protein, and particular attention should be paid to the digestive characteristics of plant meat protein in the gastrointestinal tract. Therefore, the differences in the protein digestibility properties of meat analogs and real meat is discussed in this review, focusing primarily on protein digestibility and peptide/amino acid composition of mechanically structured vegan meats. In terms of fat substitutes for meat products, the types of plant polymer colloidal systems used for meat fat substitutes is comprehensively introduced, including emulsion, hydrogel and oleogel.

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.

Differences among vegans, non-vegan vegetarians, pescatarians, and omnivores in perceived social disapproval and approval as a function of diet and source of treatment

In studies conducted in the US and Poland, vegans, non-vegan vegetarians, pescatarians, and omnivores described how they perceived they were treated by others as a function of their diet. We found that vegans thought that others treated them more negatively because of their diets than vegetarians or pescatarians did, and pescatarians thought that others treated them less negatively than vegans and vegetarians did. In Study 1 (N = 96), we found that vegans, vegetarians, and pescatarians thought that others treated them more negatively because of their diet than omnivores did. Moreover, perceptions of negative treatment were positively related to how much participants' diets differed from an omnivorous diet. We replicated these findings in Study 2 (N = 1744), and we also found that vegans, vegetarians, and pescatarians thought that others treated them more positively in some ways compared to omnivores. In Study 3 (N = 1322), we found that differences in perceptions of negative treatment by strangers among vegans, vegetarians, and pescatarians were larger than differences in perceptions of treatment by friends and family members.

Ideological resistance to veg*n advocacy: An identity-based motivational account

Animal-based diets in Western countries are increasingly regarded as unsustainable because of their impact on human health, environmental and animal welfare. Promoting shifts toward more plant-based diets seems an effective way to avoid these harms in practice. Nevertheless, claims against the consumption of animal products contradict the ideology of the omnivorous majority known as carnism. Carnism supports animal-product consumption as a cherished social habit that is harmless and unavoidable and invalidates minorities with plant-based diets: vegetarians and vegans (veg*ns). In this theoretical review, we integrate socio-psychological and empirical literature to provide an identity-based motivational account of ideological resistance to veg*n advocacy. Advocates who argue against the consumption of animal products often make claims that it is harmful, and avoidable by making dietary changes toward veg*n diets. In response, omnivores are likely to experience a simultaneous threat to their moral identity and their identity as consumer of animal products, which may arouse motivations to rationalize animal-product consumption and to obscure harms. If omnivores engage in such motivated reasoning and motivated ignorance, this may also inform negative stereotyping and stigmatization of veg*n advocates. These "pro-carnist" and "counter-veg*n" defenses can be linked with various personal and social motivations to eat animal products (e.g., meat attachment, gender, speciesism) and reinforce commitment to and ambivalence about eating animal products. This does not mean, however, that veg*n advocates cannot exert any influence. An apparent resistance may mask indirect and private acceptance of advocates' claims, priming commitment to change behavior toward veg*n diets often at a later point in time. Based on our theoretical account, we provide directions for future research.

Comparing meat abstainers with avid meat eaters and committed meat reducers

Shifting our eating patterns toward less animal-based and more plant-based diets is urgently needed to counter climate change, address public health issues, and protect animal welfare. Although most consumers agree that these are important topics, many consumers are not particularly willing to decrease the meat intensity of their diets. In supporting consumers to shift their diets, it is important to understand consumers' attitudes, motivations, and preferences related to meat consumption and to take differences across consumers on these aspects into account. This study aims to in-depth research meat abstainers (vegetarians and vegans), and to explore how and to what extent they differ from avid meat eaters and committed meat reducers in terms of their (1) socio-demographic characteristics, (2) attitudes and norms, (3) food choice motives, and (4) food preferences and behavior. A survey has been conducted among a representative sample of Dutch adults. Comparisons show that meat abstainers (N = 198) differ from committed meat reducers (N = 171) and avid meat eaters (N = 344) on the four included categories of variables. In terms of demographics, we largely confirm the stereotype of vegans and vegetarians being highly educated females. In attitudes and norms, large differences exist with meat abstainers being least pro-meat and avid meat eaters being most pro-meat. Food choice motives confirm this, with meat abstainers valuing animal welfare and a good feeling higher than committed meat reducers and avid meat eaters. Finally, differences across the groups are most pronounced in terms of their food preferences and consumption, with a much higher appreciation of plant-based protein sources among meat abstainers, a high appreciation of non-meat animal-based proteins across committed meat reducers and a high appreciation of meat products among avid meat eaters. This shows that although differences across the groups are gradual and expected, in terms of reduction motivations and preferences of protein sources the three groups (frequent meat consumption-meat reduction-meat avoidance) are very distinct, which makes it unlikely to expect big shifts from one group to another in the short term.

Exploring the role of mindful eating and self-compassion on eating behaviours and orthorexia in people following a vegan diet

Orthorexia nervosa (ON) is a new concept that is more prevalent in vegan populations. ON is characterised by obsessive focus on healthy eating, following restrictive dietary practices and dietary restrictions escalating over time. The aim of this study was to explore problematic eating behaviours in a vegan population, and to explore whether mindful eating and self-compassion have an impact on ON. Two hundred and eighty-seven females and twenty-eight males who followed a vegan diet completed scales in Orthorexia, Self-Compassion, Mindful, Emotional, External and Restraint Eating. The results indicated that individuals with high levels of ON display low levels of self-compassion, and high levels of restrained eating. Moreover, the findings indicated that self-compassion, but not mindful eating, partially mediated the relationship between restrained eating and orthorexia nervosa. The present results contribute to a better understanding of orthorexic eating behaviours in a vegan population, and identifies the mediating capacity of self-compassion. Further implications and future directions are discussed.Level of evidence: Level V, cross-sectional descriptive study.

Veganism during the COVID-19 pandemic: Vegans' and nonvegans' perspectives

Although the COVID-19 pandemic has triggered growing public interest in veganism, veganism's conceptualization remains ambiguous. Moreover, vegans' and nonvegans' different perspectives have rarely been addressed. Hence, this study involved the opinions of both vegans and nonvegans in the COVID-19 context to understand their attitudes, motivations, and opinions related to veganism. We analyzed online discourses in vegan and antivegan online communities using Word2Vec analysis and qualitative analysis. We identified lists of terms associated with three key veganism dimensions (i.e., lifestyle, animal rights, and food). Moreover, we compared actual online discussions among vegans to those among nonvegans regarding specific veganism attributes. This study preliminarily identifies specific attributes associated with veganism in online discourse among vegans. The issues addressed in this study can be tested in future research. Our findings can also be useful for people in various stages of veganism-such as active vegans, people who are interested in veganism, or even nonvegans who are uninterested in veganism-to comprehend the different perceptions prevailing in each group.

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.

Moralistic stereotyping of Vegans:The role of dietary motivation and advocacy status

Ambivalent attitudes exist toward vegans: While people may admire vegans' moral aims and commitment, they may also derogate vegans for seeming arrogant and overcommitted. These latter negative perceptions may undermine the effectiveness of efforts to reduce meat consumption for health, animal-welfare, and sustainability benefits. In the present research, we investigated the role of a vegan's motivation (animal ethics vs. health) in moralized attitudes toward vegans among omnivorous participants through two preregistered studies. In Study 1 (N = 390), we found that a vegan advocate motivated by animal ethics (vs. health) was seen as more moral but not as more arrogantly overcommitted. In Study 2 (N = 1177), we found that animal ethics (vs. health) vegans were seen as both more arrogantly committed and more morally committed, but that relative moral commitment perceptions were attenuated when vegans were described as actively advocating. Both advocating (vs. non-advocating) vegans and animal ethics (vs. health) vegans were generally seen as less socially attractive by omnivores due to stronger attributions of arrogant overcommitment, and a lower social attractiveness was associated with a lower willingness to eat less animal products. Our findings inform ongoing debates within the vegan movement about the effectiveness of signaling moral commitment in promoting plant-based diets.

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.

Morally admirable or moralistically deplorable? A theoretical framework for understanding character judgments of vegan advocates

Over the last decade, vegan advocates have become a growing minority. By arguing against animal-product consumption and imposing the virtue-loaded call to "go vegan," advocates have posed a direct challenge to the mainstream dietary ideology (termed "carnism") in hopes of positive social change. As a consequence, while vegan advocates may be admired for their morality and commitment, they may also be derogated with moralistic traits such as arrogance and overcommitment. We call this mixed-valence perception the "vegan paradox" and propose a theoretical framework for understanding it. Next, we develop a future research agenda to test and apply our framework, and inquire vegan advocacy for ethical, health, and environmental aims. Using the perspective of the idealistic vegan advocate as a reference point, we discuss the roles of the advocate's motives for change (i.e., the effectiveness of moral persuasion), the advocate's call for change (i.e., radical versus incremental change), the target's moral and carnist identification, and source attributes of the advocate. Lastly, we qualify our framework by highlighting further conceptual and methodological considerations.