To eat or not to eat. A comparison of current and former animal product limiters

Haverstock, Katie; Forgays, Deborah Kirby

doi:10.1016/j.appet.2012.02.048

Cited by 87 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Following Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) we included Festinger's theory in our model. The literature that we reviewed confirms this ''meat paradox'' (see also Loughnan et al 2014) which meat-eaters experience when they are reminded that their behaviour may not match their values and attitudes, and the resolution of this tension by changing diet fits with this dissonance (Bastian et al 2012;Bergmann et al 2010;Harmon-Jones and Mills 1999;Piazza et al 2015). However, people tend to avoid or resist information about the negative consequences of meat-eating because they contradict or threaten basic perspectives on fairness and ethical behaviour and can give rise to strong, emotionally distressing reactions.…”

Section: Emotions and Cognitive Dissonancementioning

confidence: 78%

“…On the other hand, in many cultures and religions ''the consumption of various types of meat is hedged around with complex sets of taboos and prohibitions'' (Beardsworth and Bryman 2004, p. 314). Haverstock and Forgays (2012) confirm that animal product shifters see such eating patterns as a part of their cultural and religious backgrounds, which may dictate some food choices or avoidance since the ahimsa concept (non-injury to living creatures) is a basic tenet of religions such as Buddhism, Hinduism and Jainism.…”

Section: Culture and Religionmentioning

confidence: 88%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reducing meat consumption in developed and transition countries to counter climate change and biodiversity loss: a review of influence factors

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A dietary shift towards reduced meat consumption is an efficient strategy for countering biodiversity loss and climate change in regions (developed and transition countries) where consumption is already at a very high level or is rapidly expanding (such as China). Biodiversity is being degraded and lost to a considerable extent, with 70 % of the world's deforestation a result of stripping in order to grow animal feed. Furthermore, about 14.5 % of the world's anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) are calculated to be the result of (mainly industrial) livestock farming. The research reviewed here focuses on the feasibility of reducing meat consumption in developed and transition countries, as this would-among other positive effects-reduce the global loss of biodiversity, the need for unsustainable agricultural practices and GHG emissions. This article reviews the barriers, opportunities and steps that need to be taken in order to encourage the consumption of less meat, based on an interdisciplinary and multifactor approach. The evidence is gathered from a systematic metaanalysis of factors (including personal, sociocultural and external factors) that influence individual meat-eating behaviour. The most relevant factors that influence behaviour appear to be emotions and cognitive dissonance (between knowledge, conflicting values and actual behaviour) and sociocultural factors (e.g. social norms or social identity). For different factors and groups of people, different strategies are appropriate. For example, for men and older people deploying the health argument or arguing for flexitarianism (reduced meat consumption) may prove the most promising approaches, while providing emotional messages or promoting new social norms is recommended in order to address barriers such as cognitive dissonance.

show abstract

Section: Emotions and Cognitive Dissonancementioning

confidence: 78%

Section: Culture and Religionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Reducing meat consumption in developed and transition countries to counter climate change and biodiversity loss: a review of influence factors

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In some other surveys, however, meat has been reported as a food category yielding low "desire to eat", in particular with women and vegetarians (Blechert, Meule, Busch, & Ohla, 2014). Although deliberate meat avoidance is more common amongst Western females than males (DeMello, 2012;Fiddes, 1991;Ruby, 2012), this is not universal (Morris, 1994) and could as well be due to present-day concerns about weight control, health, and animal ethics, or to differences in stress-induced eating behaviour (Haverstock & Forgays, 2012). Note that gender effects also appear in the subsequent levels of the model, as discussed below.…”

Section: Contemporary Effects and Implications For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 90%

Meat traditions. The co-evolution of humans and meat

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…FN score was lowest for nonvegetarians and higher for vegetarians and ovo-vegetarians (P 0.05). It has been reported that culture and religious backgrounds may dictate some food choices or avoidances (Haverstock and Forgays 2012).…”

Section: Age and Diet's Association With Food Neophobiamentioning

confidence: 99%

Neophobic Tendencies and Dietary Behavior in A Cohort of Female College Students from Southern India

Chitra¹,

Adhikari

Radhika

et al. 2015

Journal of Sensory Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to examine the relationship of female adolescents’ neophobic tendencies with their general dietary patterns/behaviors. The study was performed at a girl's college in Secunderabad in Southern India. A survey was administered to 1,446 girls, aged 15–19 years to collect information on food neophobia and dietary practices. The results show that the nonvegetarian group was the least neophobic group out of the three diet groups, while the vegetarian group was the most neophobic. Overall there was no difference in neophobic tendencies between the two age groups (15–17 and 18–19 years).Participants who indicated that they consumed high‐fat/junk foods regularly were less neophobic. Lower food neophobia scores was a significant indicator of greater consumption of meals outside the home or take‐out meals. These results could help shape successful interventions against obesogenic behavior in adolescents. Practical Applications This study is particularly interesting because the neophobic tendencies of people living in the Indian subcontinent have been relatively undocumented. The findings from this study demonstrate that the vegetarians and the ovo‐vegetarians were more neophobic than the nonvegetarians. The nonvegetarian group had less neophobic tendencies and was more open to trying new/novel foods and cuisines than the vegetarian and ovo‐vegetarian groups. The study of food neophobia is of particular importance because food neophobia can impact food preferences. Understanding the factors influencing food preferences is essential for the implementation and promotion of positive changes in the food habits of any society, especially with the prevalence of obesity, which is becoming a growing concern in both developing and developed countries. Nutritional intake during adolescence is important for growth and the development of lifelong eating behaviors, and may have long‐term health implications. The findings from this study suggest that if programs to improve adolescent nutrition are to be effective, they need to address a broad range of factors including environmental factors.

show abstract

To eat or not to eat. A comparison of current and former animal product limiters

Cited by 87 publications

References 20 publications

Reducing meat consumption in developed and transition countries to counter climate change and biodiversity loss: a review of influence factors

Reducing meat consumption in developed and transition countries to counter climate change and biodiversity loss: a review of influence factors

Meat traditions. The co-evolution of humans and meat

Neophobic Tendencies and Dietary Behavior in A Cohort of Female College Students from Southern India

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About