To combine or not to combine? Applying protection motivation theory and the theory of reasoned action to explain and predict intention to reduce meat consumption

Abstract

AbstractReducing meat consumption is one of the most crucial recommendations for achieving more sustainable food consumption and mitigating the harm caused by climate change. The aim of this study was to provide a more comprehensive framework for understanding consumer intention to reduce meat consumption. This study examined three models that were based on protection motivation theory (PMT), the theory of planned behavior (TPB), and a combination of PMT and the theory of reasoned action (TRA). These three models were evaluated against each other with respect to their ability to effectively explain and predict consumer intention to reduce meat consumption. The sample comprised 671 respondents in Taiwan. Structural equation modeling analyses revealed that the explanatory power of the combined PMT and TRA model and the original PMT model are almost equivalent; they could explain more than 85% of the variation in consumer intention to reduce meat consumption. However, the combined PMT and TRA model can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the determinants of consumer intention to reduce meat consumption. Both threat appraisal and coping appraisal contributed to consumer protection motivation. The TPB model explained more than 75% of the variance in consumer intention to reduce meat consumption; moreover, attitude, subjective norms, and self‐efficacy (a proxy for perceived behavioral control) were positive contributors. Although the TPB model is simple and has satisfactory explanatory power, the combined PMT and TRA model provided greater insights with higher explanatory power for consumer intention to reduce meat consumption.