Dietary similarity of friends and lovers: Vegetarianism, omnivorism, and personal relationships

The role of vegetarianism, gender, and food choice motivations on vegetable intake among university students

Objective: This study investigated collegians' (N = 466) vegetable consumption as a function of their food choice motivations, gender, and dietary habits. Method: Vegetarians and vegans (veg*ns, n = 94, 60% women), occasional meat eaters (n = 90, 66% women), and omnivores (n = 282, 43% women) completed the Food Choice Questionnaire and reported frequency of vegetable consumption. Results: Veg*ns consumed vegetables more frequently than omnivores and occasional meat eaters. Veg*ns' and occasional meat eaters' food choices were more motivated by natural content, health, and ethics, and less motivated by familiarity compared to omnivores. Women were more motivated than men by weight control. Health concerns predicted vegetable consumption for all dietary groups. Additionally, familiarity predicted veg*ns vegetable consumption, whereas mood, natural content, and convenience predicted omnivores' vegetable consumption. Conclusions: Individual differences in dietary habits and food choice motivations should be considered when designing strategies to promote healthful diets for university students.

Eating vegan due to cancer: A different social experience than other vegan dieters?

Many diagnosed with cancer change their diet in response to the diagnosis, with a vegan diet being a common choice. There may be health benefits to this, but research has demonstrated that following a vegan diet can have negative social ramifications. These social ramifications seem to be experienced to a lesser extent by those who following a vegan diet for health versus moral reasons, but this is a heterogeneous group; people may choose the diet for a myriad of different health reasons. In two pre-reregistered studies, we examined the social experience of those who adopt a vegan diet following a cancer diagnosis. Study 1, an experimental study, demonstrated that omnivores responded more positively to a friend who was vegan for cancer reasons than animal or general health reasons, which was explained by increased empathy. In Study 2, a cross-sectional survey study, those who adopted a vegan diet due to cancer reported (overall) less negative social experiences than those following a vegan diet more generally. These participants reported that cancer represented a greater social challenge than their diet. Taken together, these findings suggest that "vegan due to cancer" is a unique social identity and a unique social experience, relative to that of those motivated by other reasons, including general health reasons.

Spontaneous verbal descriptions of vegans, non-vegan vegetarians, and omnivores and relationships between these descriptions and perceivers' diets

Participants, 672 US collegians, listed four words/terms that first came to mind when thinking of vegans, non-vegan vegetarians, and omnivores. Participants generated 1264 unique descriptors, which two sets of raters, who were blind to the source of the descriptors, rated on 10 dimensions that included the valence of the descriptors (i.e., positive, negative). A series of multilevel models in which descriptors were nested within persons, found that descriptors referring to environmental issues and health were used more frequently when describing both vegans and vegetarians than when describing omnivores. Descriptors referring to deviance, lifestyle, and politics were used more frequently when describing both vegans and vegetarians than when describing omnivores. Overall, vegans were viewed more negatively than vegetarians who were viewed more negatively than omnivores. These differences were moderated by the extent to which participants restricted meat from their diet. Those who restricted meat from their diets to a greater extent had more negative perceptions and fewer positive perceptions of omnivores, whereas they had more positive perceptions of vegans and vegetarians, and fewer positive perceptions of omnivores. The present study is the first to use spontaneous verbal reports to examine attitudes and perceptions of people based on their eating habits. The results suggest that dietary habits can serve as a basis for social identity, which in turn affects perceptions of others.

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.

Meat-eating justification and relationship closeness with veg*n family, friends, and romantic partners

A study of 190 omnivores examined their meat-eating justification (MEJ) beliefs and relationship closeness with veg*n friends, family members, and romantic partners; and how relationship closeness changes after veg*n diets are adopted. Denial and dissociation MEJs predicted lower closeness, whereas the hierarchical MEJ predicted higher closeness. Results also showed that relationship closeness significantly decreased for frequency and diversity of activities after adoption of veg*n diets. Closeness in terms of strength significantly increased after adoption of veg*n diets. A significant interaction was found between relationship type and time in which frequency of interactions decreased for friends and family after adoption of veg*n diets but did not change for romantic partners. These results suggest that only MEJs with moral considerations that elicit meat-related cognitive dissonance reduce relationship closeness after the adoption of veg*n diets; and that relationship closeness decreases after the adoption of veg*n diets only with friends or family members.

The role of perceived descriptive and injunctive norms on the self-reported frequency of meat and plant-based meal intake in UK-based adults

Perceived social norms refer to beliefs that people hold about what other people do (descriptive norms) and approve of (injunctive norms), and are associated with food intake. However, less is known about whether perceived social norms are associated with meat and plant-based meal intake. Using a cross-sectional survey design 136 participants (aged 19-66 years, mean age = 39.63, SD = 12.85 years, mean BMI = 25.77, SD = 5.30, 80.9 % female, 77.9 % omnivores, 22.1 % flexitarians) answered questions about how frequently they consumed meat and plant-based meals, and how frequently they perceived people in their social environment to consume (perceived descriptive norms), and approve of consuming (perceived injunctive norms) meat and plant-based meals. Perceived descriptive and injunctive norms were positively associated with participants' frequency of meat intake: participants ate meat more frequently when they perceived their significant other to frequently eat meat (descriptive norm), and when they perceived their significant other and friends to approve of (injunctive norm) frequently eating meat. Perceived descriptive norms were positively associated, but injunctive norms were negatively associated with participants' frequency of plant-based meal intake: participants ate plant-based meals more frequently when they perceived their extended family, friends, and significant other to frequently eat plant-based meals. However, participants ate plant-based meals more frequently when they perceived their extended family to approve of less frequent plant-based meal intake. These results suggest that different social groups may be important for meat and plant-based meal intake, with significant others and friends appearing to be important reference points for both food types. Further research examining the contexts in which the different social groups influence eating behaviour would be of value.

Vegetarianism/Veganism: A Way to Feel Good

Previous studies have identified health, the environment and animal welfare as key motivations for becoming and remaining vegetarian/vegan. However, the idea of vegetarianism/veganism appears to have interesting facets that go beyond those drivers. This paper describes and examines this attraction. Twenty-six in depth interviews and two group discussions were conducted using the Morphological Psychology approach, which allows the revelation of conscious as well as unconscious drivers based on the detailed narrations of the interviewees. We conclude that the attractiveness of vegetarianism/veganism cannot only be explained by the classical and conscious motivations of a meatless or animal-free diet such as improving health and animal welfare. It also comprises less conscious or unconscious drivers of vegetarianism/veganism such as empowerment and enrichment, regaining autonomy and creating identity and superiority in addition to and partly through liberation from a meat production system which is perceived as destructive and threatening.