Literature DB >> 31830517

Dissociating meat from its animal origins: A systematic literature review.

Nora C G Benningstad1, Jonas R Kunst2.   

Abstract

Meat eaters often have an ambivalent relationship with the common practice of killing animals for food. They enjoy the taste of meat but dislike the harming of animals that it entails. This moral conflict, often referred to as the 'meat paradox,' tends to result in cognitive dissonance that meat eaters need to resolve. One of the arguably most basic strategies to deal with this dissonance is to cognitively dissociate meat from its animal origins. Whereas philosophers for long time have theorized about the role of such dissociation for consumer behavior, researchers have only recently started to empirically investigate the phenomenon. Here, we present the first systematic literature review of research on consumers' tendency to dissociate meat from its animal origins. Twenty-one publications comprising eight qualitative, one mixed-methods, four correlational, and twenty experimental/interventional studies were identified, which all provided support for the central psychological role of dissociation for meat consumption. However, the review also revealed the need for further research on moderating variables such as gender, age and generation, dietary styles, and people's place of living, including cross-cultural differences. Strikingly, no study so far seems to have included behavioral outcomes, urging the need for future research on how dissociation might affect behavior.
Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Animals; Cognitive dissonance; Dissociation; Literature review; Meat consumption; Meat paradox

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31830517     DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2019.104554

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appetite        ISSN: 0195-6663            Impact factor:   3.868


  4 in total

1.  Psychological Science in the Wake of COVID-19: Social, Methodological, and Metascientific Considerations.

Authors:  Daniel L Rosenfeld; Emily Balcetis; Brock Bastian; Elliot T Berkman; Jennifer K Bosson; Tiffany N Brannon; Anthony L Burrow; C Daryl Cameron; Serena Chen; Jonathan E Cook; Christian Crandall; Shai Davidai; Kristof Dhont; Paul W Eastwick; Sarah E Gaither; Steven W Gangestad; Thomas Gilovich; Kurt Gray; Elizabeth L Haines; Martie G Haselton; Nick Haslam; Gordon Hodson; Michael A Hogg; Matthew J Hornsey; Yuen J Huo; Samantha Joel; Frank J Kachanoff; Gordon Kraft-Todd; Mark R Leary; Alison Ledgerwood; Randy T Lee; Steve Loughnan; Cara C MacInnis; Traci Mann; Damian R Murray; Carolyn Parkinson; Efrén O Pérez; Tom Pyszczynski; Kaylin Ratner; Hank Rothgerber; James D Rounds; Mark Schaller; Roxane Cohen Silver; Barbara A Spellman; Nina Strohminger; Janet K Swim; Felix Thoemmes; Betul Urganci; Joseph A Vandello; Sarah Volz; Vivian Zayas; A Janet Tomiyama
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2021-10-01

Review 2.  Interventions to reduce meat consumption by appealing to animal welfare: Meta-analysis and evidence-based recommendations.

Authors:  Maya B Mathur; Jacob Peacock; David B Reichling; Janice Nadler; Paul A Bain; Christopher D Gardner; Thomas N Robinson
Journal:  Appetite       Date:  2021-05-11       Impact factor: 5.016

3.  Meating Conflict: Toward a Model of Ambivalence-Motivated Reduction of Meat Consumption.

Authors:  Shiva Pauer; Bastiaan T Rutjens; Matthew B Ruby; Grischa Perino; Frenk van Harreveld
Journal:  Foods       Date:  2022-03-23

4.  How will the COVID-19 pandemic shape the future of meat consumption?

Authors:  Sophie Attwood; Cother Hajat
Journal:  Public Health Nutr       Date:  2020-08-12       Impact factor: 4.022

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.