Pleasure vs. identity: More eating simulation language in meat posts than plant-based posts on social media #foodtalk

How (not) to talk about plant-based foods: using language to support the transition to sustainable diets

Reducing meat consumption is essential to curb further climate change and limit the catastrophic environmental degradation resulting from the current global food system. However, consumers in industrialised countries are hesitant to reduce their meat intake, often because they find plant-based foods less appealing. Despite the climate emergency, eating meat is still perceived as the norm, and recommended in most national dietary guidelines. To support the transition to more sustainable diets by providing insights for increasing the appeal of plant-based foods to mainstream consumers, this review presents recent research findings on how people think and communicate about meat-based and plant-based foods. The key findings we review include: (1) while vegans think about plant-based foods in terms of enjoyable eating experiences, omnivores think about plant-based foods in terms of health, vegan identity and other abstract information that does not motivate consumption in the moment. (2) Packages of ready-meals and social media posts on Instagram present plant-based foods with fewer references to enjoyable eating experiences than meat-based foods. (3) Presenting plant-based foods with language that references enjoyable eating experiences increases their appeal, especially for habitual meat eaters. This language includes words about sensory features of the food (e.g., crunchy, creamy), eating context (e.g. pub; with family) and immediate positive consequences of eating (e.g. comforting, delicious). In contrast, the term 'vegan' is strongly associated with negative stereotypes. Hence, rather than referring to being vegan, meat-free or healthy, the language used for plant-based foods should refer to sensory appeal, attractive eating situations and enjoyment.

Health psychology and climate change: time to address humanity's most existential crisis

Climate change is an ongoing and escalating health emergency. It threatens the health and wellbeing of billions of people, through extreme weather events, displacement, food insecurity, pathogenic diseases, societal destabilisation, and armed conflict. Climate change dwarfs all other challenges studied by health psychologists. The greenhouse gas emissions driving climate change disproportionately originate from the actions of wealthy populations in the Global North and are tied to excessive energy use and overconsumption driven by the pursuit of economic growth. Addressing this crisis requires significant societal transformations and individual behaviour change. Most of these changes will benefit not only the stability of the climate but will yield significant public health co-benefits. Because of their unique expertise and skills, health psychologists are urgently needed in crafting climate change mitigation responses. We propose specific ways in which health psychologists at all career stages can contribute, within the spheres of research, teaching, and policy making, and within organisations and as private citizens. As health psychologists, we cannot sit back and leave climate change to climate scientists. Climate change is a health emergency that results from human behaviour; hence it is in our power and responsibility to address it.

Polarizing Plates: Both Omnivores and Vegans Represent In-Group Foods With Eating Simulations

In two pre-registered experiments, we assessed how people cognitively represent meat and plant-based foods, to examine processes underlying dietary polarization in society. Food descriptions from U.K.-based omnivores (NExp. 1 = 109; NExp. 2 = 436) and vegans (NExp. 1 = 111; NExp. 2 = 407) were coded for features about consumption and reward (e.g., "rich," "indulgent," and "treat") or features independent of the consumption situation (e.g., "healthy," "protein," and "eco-friendly"). Participants used more consumption and reward features for diet-congruent dishes (meat dishes for omnivores and plant-based dishes for vegans) than for diet-incongruent dishes (vice versa). Omnivores focused on abstract, long-term consequences of plant-based foods, whereas vegans focused on the socio-political associations with meat foods. Consumption and reward features also positively predicted attractiveness ratings, the likelihood of ordering a dish, and eating intentions. These findings indicate the cognitive processes of polarized dietary groups that may hinder the mainstream transition to more sustainable food choices.

Appealing dish names to nudge diners to more sustainable food choices: a quasi-experimental study

BACKGROUND

Promoting plant-rich diets, i.e., diets with significantly reduced amounts of animal products, including vegan and vegetarian, is a promising strategy to help address the dual environmental and health crises that we currently face. Appealing dish names could boost interest in plant-rich dishes by attracting diners' attention to them. In this study, a systematic approach to naming plant-rich dishes with appealing descriptors was tested with a quasi-experimental design in four workplace, self-service, buffet-style cafeterias in Chicago, Sydney, São Paulo and Singapore.

METHODS

Three different plant-rich dishes were tested at each site. Appealing names were generated systematically through a workshop and emphasized the dish ingredients, origin, flavor and/or the eating experience. Each test dish appeared once in a four-week menu cycle where menu options changed on a daily basis. The cycle was then repeated four times (six times in Chicago) with the total number of showings for each dish to be four (six in Chicago). The dish names alternated between basic and appealing across dish repetitions. For each dish, the food taken per plate was estimated by weighing the overall food taken and dividing it by the plate count in the cafeteria. Data was analysed as percentage change from baseline (i.e., the first showing of each dish that always had a basic name) with linear mixed effects analysis using the lme4 package in R.

RESULTS

Overall, appealing dish names significantly increased the amount of food taken per plate by 43.9% relative to baseline compared to basic dish names (54.5% vs. 10.6% increase for appealing vs. basic names, respectively, p = .002). This increase corresponded to a 7% increase in actual grams of food taken per plate. Secondary analysis showed that the effect was site-specific to English-speaking countries only and that there was no substitution effect between plant-rich and meat dishes.

CONCLUSIONS

The study tested an approach to creating appealing dish names in a systematic way and indicates that, in some settings, appealing dish titles are a relatively easy, scalable, cost-effective strategy that the food services sector can adopt to shift food choices towards more plant-rich, sustainable ones.