Abstract
Both epidemiological studies and randomised controlled trials have shown that meat-eating can be harmful to human health. Meat-eating is also considered to be a moral issue, impacting negatively on the environment and the welfare of animals. To date, very little scientific research has aimed to reduce this dietary behavior. Therefore, the current research tests the effectiveness of a 4-week multicomponent intervention designed to reduce meat-eating. Using a randomised controlled trial procedure, thirty-two young men (mean age: 23.5 ± 3.1 years old) were randomly assigned into two equal groups, the intervention vs control group. Based on research in social and health psychology, the intervention was composed of five components expected to reduce meat consumption: a social norm component; an informational/educational component; an appeal to fear; a mind attribution induction; and a goal setting/self-monitoring component. Measures of different types of meat intake (using dietary journals) were taken at baseline (Time 1) as well as 2 (Time 2) and 4 weeks later (Time 3). Emotions and attitudes toward meat-eating and animals were also assessed at Time 3. Significant reductions in total and weekend red meat consumption as well as cold cuts consumed on the weekend were observed in the intervention condition from Time 1 to Time 3. Moreover, reduced positive emotions toward eating meat mediated the reduction in red meat consumption. The component of the intervention that participants most often perceived as having led to a reduction in their meat consumption was the informational component. In conclusion, results provide support for the effectiveness of the multicomponent intervention and for the mediating role of positive emotions when predicting behavioral changes in meat consumption.
Highlights
The empirical evidence showing how meat-eating can be detrimental to human health is accumulating
Average body mass index (BMI), computed as weight in kilograms divided by squared height in meters, was 23.3 kg/m2 (SD = 1.98; range: 20.8–28.5)
Using a multiple linear regression with the entry method, in which we forced the predictors of interest into the model, we examined which variables are the most important predictors of the change in red meat consumption from Time 1 to Time 3
Summary
The empirical evidence showing how meat-eating can be detrimental to human health is accumulating. Testing a meat-reduction intervention osteoarthritis [8], and even better mood [9]. On the basis of these findings, the World Health Organization in 2015 recommended the consumption of red meat on an exceptional basis and to avoid processed meat altogether. Meat-eating has been identified as a direct contributor of climate change given the resources and energy required to produce meat [13,14]. These environmental issues are recognized as likely to have, in the medium- and longer-term, detrimental consequences on human health [15]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
