Emotional Battles Over Meat: Evading Factual Arguments
Study Suggests Emotional and Moral Appeals Key to Encouraging Plant-Based Diets
A new study conducted by Professor Patrizia Catellani at the Psychology, Law and Policy Lab (PsyLab) at the Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Milan, has found that emotional and moral appeals may be more effective than facts alone in encouraging a reduction in meat consumption.
The study, which was originally published under Creative Commons by 360infoTM, explores the effectiveness of disgust-based and moral appeals in influencing people's dietary choices.
Disgust-Based Appeals and Plant-Based Diets
The study found that messages triggering physical or moral disgust may weaken people's enjoyment of meat or their ability to morally disengage from the consequences of animal suffering. However, it also revealed that a physical disgust message reduced participants' enjoyment of meat eating, leading to a higher likelihood of choosing plant-based foods. This effect was particularly pronounced among those with lower levels of belief in human supremacy.
Interestingly, the study suggests that disgust-based appeals can be moderated through whimsical, cute, or empathetic framing to reduce resistance and increase openness to plant-based diets. For example, using baby animals or playful imagery can soften the moral message and facilitate empathy, thereby promoting diet interest more effectively than negative disgust appeals alone.
Moral Appeals and Human Supremacy
The study also found that moral appeals grounded in challenging human supremacy beliefs face significant cultural barriers. Pro-meat narratives often frame meat consumption as "natural," "empowering," and morally justified, reinforcing human dominance and making moral appeals for plant-based diets harder to internalize.
Those who strongly believe in human superiority may rely on moral disengagement to resolve cognitive dissonance between their values and their dietary habits. The study found a marginal effect of the physical disgust message on moral disengagement, suggesting that visceral reactions to unhygienic or violent images could disrupt moral rationalisations.
Positive Emotional Framing and Diet Adherence
Empirical evidence on emotional states shows that individuals in positive emotional states are more likely to adhere to vegan or plant-based diets. Positive emotional framing and social identity play important roles in diet adherence and receptivity to plant-based diets. People with higher positive identification with their dietarian group tend to have better mental health and diet commitment.
Implications for Dietary Change
The study offers insights into the psychological barriers to dietary change, suggesting that appeals that focus solely on health or climate impact may not be enough to overcome the emotional satisfaction that many consumers derive from eating meat. Instead, effective advocacy may combine emotional intelligence and storytelling with moral arguments, avoiding solely negative or confrontational tactics.
Challenging this moral distance through targeted messaging may be a more effective strategy than appealing to individuals who already share ethical concerns but continue to eat meat for other reasons. The findings support a broader shift in behavioural science and public health communication that recognises the limitations of rational appeals.
In summary, the study suggests that multi-faceted emotional and moral communication strategies that balance empathy, identity affirmation, and subtle moral framing—rather than stark disgust or moral superiority alone—are most effective in encouraging plant-based diet adoption.
- The study reveals that a physical disgust message can reduce people's enjoyment of meat eating, leading to a higher likelihood of choosing plant-based foods, especially among those with lower levels of belief in human supremacy.
- Interestingly, the study suggests that disgust-based appeals can be moderated through whimsical, cute, or empathetic framing, which can soften the moral message and promote diet interest more effectively than negative disgust appeals alone.
- The study found that moral appeals grounded in challenging human supremacy beliefs face significant cultural barriers, as pro-meat narratives often frame meat consumption as "natural," "empowering," and morally justified, reinforcing human dominance.
- Empirical evidence on emotional states shows that individuals in positive emotional states are more likely to adhere to vegan or plant-based diets, highlighting the role of positive emotional framing and social identity in diet adherence and receptivity to plant-based diets.
