Article

A Meaty Matter: Pet Diet and the Vegetarian's Dilemma.

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.

Abstract

The present research examined pet ownership, current pet diet, and guilt associated with pet diet among a fairly large sample of non-meat-eaters (n=515). It specifically focused on the conflict that pits feeding one's pet an animal-based diet that may be perceived as best promoting their well-being with concerns over animal welfare and environmental degradation threatened by such diets, here labeled the vegetarian's dilemma. Questionnaire responses indicated that ethically motivated meat abstainers were more likely to own pets and owned more of them than those motivated by health concerns or a combination of ethical and health concerns. Vegans and those resisting meat on ethical grounds were more likely to feed their pet a vegetarian diet and expressed the greatest concerns over feeding their pet an animal-based diet. For vegans and ethical meat abstainers, it is suggested that questions concerning what to feed their pet approaches a tragic tradeoff contrasting two sacred values: protecting the well-being of their pets and protecting the well-being of other animals and the environment. For meat abstainers motivated by health concerns, this constitutes a relatively easy moral problem because the primary concern for such individuals is the health of their pet with less or no regard for other ramifications of the decision, i.e., harming other animals or the environment.

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.

... Extremely ecologically driven people buy eco-friendly goods (Wang et al., 2014) [100] and might follow a greener diet (Rothgerber, 2013;Radnitz et al., 2015;Janssen et al., 2016) [12,14,101]. Therefore, buying eco-friendly, whether vegetarian or vegan, can be related to ecological motivations (Majláth, 2008;Franzen & Mayer, 2010) [102,103] and also to a higher sense of environmental responsibility (Dagher & Itani, 2014) [104]. ...
... Therefore, buying eco-friendly, whether vegetarian or vegan, can be related to ecological motivations (Majláth, 2008;Franzen & Mayer, 2010) [102,103] and also to a higher sense of environmental responsibility (Dagher & Itani, 2014) [104]. Ecological motivations impact attitudes concerning the consumption of vegan products because green products are ecological merchandise (Tobler et al., 2011;Rothgerber, 2013;Radnitz et al., 2015) [14,105,106]. ...
... Therefore, buying eco-friendly, whether vegetarian or vegan, can be related to ecological motivations (Majláth, 2008;Franzen & Mayer, 2010) [102,103] and also to a higher sense of environmental responsibility (Dagher & Itani, 2014) [104]. Ecological motivations impact attitudes concerning the consumption of vegan products because green products are ecological merchandise (Tobler et al., 2011;Rothgerber, 2013;Radnitz et al., 2015) [14,105,106]. ...
Article
Full-text available
The purpose of this investigation is to understand what influences the involvement with vegan products when comparing vegan and non-vegan individuals. This study presents eco-motivated antecedents (ecological motivations, environmental concerns, animal welfare) and personal antecedents (social influence, idealism). Also, the influence of involvement with vegan products on eudemonic and hedonic happiness, purchase intention, and price sensitivity. The impact price sensitivity has on purchase intention is presented. The research uses a structured questionnaire to collect information from two cross-sectional samples, 580 vegans and 517 non-vegans, collected from four vegan groups on Facebook, for a total of 284,900 members. Structural equation modeling (SEM) is used to test the proposed hypotheses. Results show that among vegans, ecological motivations and social influence do not impact involvement with vegan products. Vegans choose this lifestyle mainly due to animal protection, environmental concerns, and ideological views. Regarding non-vegans, idealism does not impact involvement with vegan products, probably due to their moral views, since they do not stop ingesting meat. At the same time, social influence becomes a relevant predictor. A cross-sectional study does not allow inferring causality. The model could be tested by introducing variables like gender, age, personality traits, sensitivity, and religion, which could be pertinent drivers of involvement with vegan products in vegan and non-vegan groups. This investigation compares the impact of personal and eco-motivated determinants, comparing vegans and non-vegans regarding their involvement with vegan products. It also compares how involvement with vegan products predicts consumer behavior patterns among vegans and non-vegans.
... Regarding the main motives, no differences can be found between a vegetarian diet in general and a stricter vegan diet. Studies that have explicitly examined motives for adopting a vegan diet have identified three major motivations for choosing a vegan diet: firstly, ethical concerns, especially concerns about animal welfare [44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52]; secondly, health reasons [46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53]; and thirdly, somewhat less important, concerns about the environment and climate change [44][45][46][47]51,53,54]. ...
... Regarding the main motives, no differences can be found between a vegetarian diet in general and a stricter vegan diet. Studies that have explicitly examined motives for adopting a vegan diet have identified three major motivations for choosing a vegan diet: firstly, ethical concerns, especially concerns about animal welfare [44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52]; secondly, health reasons [46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53]; and thirdly, somewhat less important, concerns about the environment and climate change [44][45][46][47]51,53,54]. ...
... The three most frequently mentioned associations with vegan food stated by vegans and vegetarians, i.e., the issues of animal welfare, health, and environmental protection, are consistent with the most widely reported motives for choosing a vegan diet and the overall perception of veganism [44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52]86]. The conviction, that no distinction should be made between companion animals, farm animals, and wild animals often also leads to a vegetarian or even vegan diet [87]. ...
Article
Full-text available
This article identifies consumer segments for vegan food by analysing perceptions of vegan food among food organic consumers following different diets: vegans, vegetarians, former vegetarians, flexitarians, and omnivores. The analysis is based on responses to a quantitative consumer survey for which 503 participants were recruited from customers at German grocery stores by quota sampling according to diet and region. From the responses to an open-ended question eliciting the participants’ associations with vegan food, the analysis finds that vegans and vegetarians perceive vegan foods primarily as being beneficial for animal welfare, healthy, and environmentally friendly, while those who ate meat perceive vegan food primarily as containing no animal ingredients and as being healthy. The respondents’ varying assessments of the taste, diversity, and environmental benefits of vegan food were found to differ in relation to the various diets they followed, as did their assessments of how long the vegan trend is likely to last. A cluster analysis based on the consumers’ perceptions and attitudes revealed three consumer groups: “vegan fans”, “enjoyment sceptics”, and “originality-sceptics”. Scepticism about the originality of vegan food was found in all diet groups. These findings can help inform more effective targeting of consumer needs for vegan organic food.
... In recent decades, motivations to adopt plant-based diets have been widely studied in the fields of sociology, psychology, and nutrition. For instance, researchers have investigated possible relationships between dietary motivation for choosing plant-based diets and: dietary restraint (22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37), personality (26,38,39), disgust sensitivity (32,(40)(41)(42), attitudes toward animals and pets (41,(43)(44)(45)(46)(47), dietary intake (34,40,(48)(49)(50)(51), physical activity (23,29,33,34,(49)(50)(51), and other potential attributes related to psychological traits and health behavior (23,(50)(51)(52)(53). ...
... However, the methods of capturing dietary motivations are diverse, making it difficult to organize and assess across the literature. Methods range from the Food Choice Questionnaire (25,26,31,(54)(55)(56)(57)(58), which asks participants to rate their level of agreement (on a Likert scale) with 36 statements related to determinants of their food choices, to questionnaires that list motivations for selection (27,28,33,34,38,40,43,(45)(46)(47)49,50,52,(59)(60)(61) or provide a free response option (35,44,48,(62)(63)(64)(65). Given the heterogeneity of these methods, evidence mapping would be appropriate for summarizing the available evidence on motivations to adopt plant-based diets. ...
... There was insufficient data to isolate and group the specific other motivations that were less prevalent or not investigated as part of the questionnaire administered to participants. Furthermore, several studies reported data on these broad health versus ethical categories without providing a breakdown of specific motivations (28,29,41,(45)(46)(47)(48)51,61). By grouping motivations into three categories (health, ethical, and other), we allowed the inclusion of the maximum number of studies. ...
Article
Full-text available
Motivations to adopt plant-based diets are of great public health interest. We used evidence mapping to identify methods that capture motivations to follow plant-based diets and summarize demographic trends in dietary motivations. We identified 56 publications that described 90 samples of plant-based diet followers and their dietary motivations. We categorized the samples by type of plant-based diet: vegan (19%), vegetarian (33%), semi vegetarian (24%), and other, unspecified plant-based diet followers (23%). Of 90 studies examined, 31% administered multiple choice questions to capture motivations, followed by rate items (23%), Food Choice Questionnaire (17%), free response (9%), and rank choices (10%). Commonly reported motivations were health, sensory/taste/disgust, animal welfare, environmental concern, and weight loss. The methodological variation highlights the importance of using a structured questionnaire to investigate dietary motivations in epidemiological studies. Motivations among plant-based diet followers appear distinct, but evidence on the association between age and motivations appears limited.
... For some, however, this may conflict with ideologies to minimize or avoid use of products derived from other animals. Termed "the vegetarian's dilemma", a moral conflict has been documented amongst pet owners who avoid animal products in their own diets and report feelings of guilt and internal conflict regarding feeding animal products to their pets [27]. Recently, vegetarian and plant-based diets have been introduced to the pet food market and provide a potential resolution to this moral dilemma for vegetarians and vegans who share their homes with omnivorous and carnivorous pets [28][29][30][31]. ...
... owners reporting feeding a diet composed of less than 25% animal products [27]. It is unknown how many pet owners currently feed plant-based diets to their dogs or cats. ...
... Previous surveys have examined feeding practices and attitudes amongst vegetarian and vegan pet owners [27,28,40], but these were specifically directed at vegetarians and vegan groups and thus gave no indication as to the scope of the issue amongst the pet population in general. It was therefore the purpose of this study to estimate the number of pet owners who feed plant-based diets to their dogs and/or cats, identify their concerns regarding animal prod- ucts and ascertain their motivations for feeding plant-based diets. ...
Article
Full-text available
People who avoid eating animals tend to share their homes with animal companions, and moral dilemma may arise when they are faced with feeding animal products to their omnivorous dogs and carnivorous cats. One option to alleviate this conflict is to feed pets a diet devoid of animal ingredients—a ‘plant-based’ or ‘vegan’ diet. The number of pet owners who avoid animal products, either in their own or in their pets’ diet, is not currently known. The objective of this study was to estimate the number of meat-avoiding pet owners, identify concerns regarding conventional animal- and plant-based pet food, and estimate the number of pets fed a plant-based diet. A questionnaire was disseminated online to English-speaking pet owners (n = 3,673) to collect data regarding pet owner demographics, diet, pet type, pet diet, and concerns regarding pet foods. Results found that pet owners were more likely to be vegetarian (6.2%; 229/3,673) or vegan (5.8%; 212/3,673) than previously reported for members of the general population. With the exception of one dog owned by a vegetarian, vegans were the only pet owners who fed plant-based diets to their pets (1.6%; 59/3,673). Of the pet owners who did not currently feed plant-based diets but expressed interest in doing so, a large proportion (45%; 269/599) desired more information demonstrating the nutritional adequacy of plant-based diets. Amongst all pet owners, the concern most commonly reported regarding meat-based pet foods was for the welfare of farm animals (39%; 1,275/3,231). The most common concern regarding strictly plant-based pet foods was regarding the nutritional completeness of the diet (74%; 2,439/3,318). Amongst vegans, factors which predicted the feeding of plant-based diets to their pets were concern regarding the cost of plant-based diets, a lack of concern regarding plant-based diets being unnatural, and reporting no concern at all regarding plant-based diets for pets. Given these findings, further research is warranted to investigate plant-based nutrition for domestic dogs and cats.
... Compared to health-motivated vegetarians, ethically motivated vegetarians believe less strongly in the human uniqueness of primary emotions, ascribe greater primary and secondary emotions to pigs, and ascribe greater primary emotions to dogs (Rothgerber, 2014a). Ethically motivated vegetarians also are more likely to own pets, own a greater number of pets, and feed their pets less meat than do health-motivated vegetarians (Rothgerber, 2013). Of those vegetarians who do feed their pets a predominantly meat-based diet, ethically motivated vegetarians report feeling guiltier about their pet's diet than do health-motivated vegetarians, an effect partially explained by ethically motivated vegetarians' lower belief in the human uniqueness of emotions (Rothgerber, 2013). ...
... Ethically motivated vegetarians also are more likely to own pets, own a greater number of pets, and feed their pets less meat than do health-motivated vegetarians (Rothgerber, 2013). Of those vegetarians who do feed their pets a predominantly meat-based diet, ethically motivated vegetarians report feeling guiltier about their pet's diet than do health-motivated vegetarians, an effect partially explained by ethically motivated vegetarians' lower belief in the human uniqueness of emotions (Rothgerber, 2013). ...
... This phenomenon may explain why many vegetarians are mixed-motive, as Rothgerber (2014a) found that 31% of vegetarians reported that ethical and health motivations were equally important to them. Still, only a few studies (e.g., Rothgerber, 2013Rothgerber, , 2014a have examined mixedmotive vegetarianism. A lingering question for future research is to identify domains in which mixed-motive vegetarians more closely resemble ethically motivated vegetarians and in which they more closely resemble health-motivated vegetarians. ...
Article
Whereas vegetarianism has long garnered attention from nutritional science and philosophy, psychological research exploring this eating behavior has emerged only in the past few decades. Six years ago, Ruby (2012) reviewed the extant literature on the psychology of vegetarianism, showcasing its promise as "a blossoming field of study." In the time since, this line of research truly has blossomed, as subsequent work has addressed prior knowledge gaps and initiated new lines of inquiry. While evidence on previously studied topics of dietary motivation, moral values, gender, differences between vegetarians and vegans, barriers to dietary change, and disordered eating has continued to expand, new lines of research on identity, social experiences, flexitarianism, culture, and prospective vegetarianism have emerged. Recent psychometric advancements, moreover, have constructed useful measures to assess relevant constructs. The current review synthesizes this amalgam of research, identifying emergent themes and highlighting promising directions for future inquiry.
... Despite this recognition, emotions were only present in 23% of the studies in this field. The emotions associated with VEG lifestyle and choices included disgust (toward meat) [96], sensory (dis)liking VEG foods [96,143], guilt related to diet consistency or pet food choice [96,268], anger [144], shame [213], fear [74], and affect or empathy responses (the capacity to feel what others are experiencing) [3,15,47,136,194]. Most previous studies did not use validated instruments to measure these emotions. ...
... For example, Crimarco et al. [145] measured participants' overall food consumption frequency, adherence to the vegan diet, and restaurant-related behaviors. In other studies, measured behaviors were related more to health, such as alcohol consumption [113] or adequate nutritional intake [192], and more rarely, to animal-related behaviors [128,256,268]. This variable appeared most frequently in the Vgt-Vgn-M (85%) and Vgn (76%) studies. ...
Article
Full-text available
Meat production and consumption are sources of animal cruelty, responsible for several environmental problems and human health diseases, and contribute to social inequality. Vegetarianism and veganism (VEG) are two alternatives that align with calls for a transition to more ethical, sustainable, and healthier lifestyles. Following the PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic literature review of 307 quantitative studies on VEG (from 1978 to 2023), collected from the Web of Science in the categories of psychology, behavioral science, social science, and consumer behavior. For a holistic view of the literature and to capture its multiple angles, we articulated our objectives by responding to the variables of “WHEN,” “WHERE,” “WHO,” “WHAT,” “WHY,” “WHICH,” and “HOW” (6W1H) regarding the VEG research. Our review highlighted that quantitative research on VEG has experienced exponential growth with an unbalanced geographical focus, accompanied by an increasing richness but also great complexity in the understating of the VEG phenomenon. The systematic literature review found different approaches from which the authors studied VEG while identifying methodological limitations. Additionally, our research provided a systematic view of factors studied on VEG and the variables associated with VEG-related behavior change. Accordingly, this study contributes to the literature in the field of VEG by mapping the most recent trends and gaps in research, clarifying existing findings, and suggesting directions for future research.
... It is also possible that pet owners are completely abstaining from purchasing animal-based products for their own consumption. Since the vast majority of commercial pet foods contain meat, these individuals face what Rothgerber (2013) referred to as The Vegetarian's Dilemma. Feeding companion animals a diet that conforms to the owner's avoidance of meat products may jeopardise the pet's welfare. ...
... Consumers appear to focus on purchasing healthy food for their dogs even more than for themselves, and price sensitivity is lower for pet food than for groceries (Tesform & Birch 2010;Boya et al. 2012). Ethical vegetarians/vegans were more likely to own pets than those who were health-focused, and also felt more guilty about feeding meat-based diets to their pets (Rothgerber 2013). One German study thoroughly discussed these connections between companion animal ownership and WTP for animal welfare-enhanced foods for human consumption (Pirsich et al. 2017) but, to the authors' knowledge, no studies have investigated whether pet owners would be willing to pay for animal welfare-enhanced pet food. ...
Article
Full-text available
Consumer concern about farmed animal welfare is growing but does not always translate into real-world purchasing behaviour of welfare-friendly animal products for human consumption. Possible reasons for this include unfamiliarity with farming practices and economic sensitivity. In contrast, the number and role of pets in the United States have grown measurably, and spending on pets is strong. The pet food market has many opportunity niches as pet owners navigate strong marketing trends and nutrition philosophies. We hypothesised that pet owners in the US would be willing to pay a premium for pet food containing welfare-friendly animal ingredients. Eight hundred and thirty-eight pet owners completed an online survey asking questions that measured their knowledge of and interest in farm animal welfare, and their willingness-to-pay for pet food labelled as farm animal welfare-friendly. Respondents overall displayed relatively low knowledge about farm animal welfare, but poor self-assessment of their own knowledge. They displayed interest in farm animal welfare and an overall positive mean willingness-to-pay (WTP) for welfare-friendly pet food. Younger respondents, women and cat owners displayed a higher WTP than older respondents, men and dog owners. Income level was not correlated to WTP. Creating pet food products that contain animal ingredients produced using welfare-friendly practices may enhance farm animal welfare via two primary avenues: by providing a sustainable and value-added outlet for the by-products of welfare-friendly human food products, and by providing an educational opportunity about farm animal production via pet food packaging and other advertising.
... At the same time, pet feeding practices can be problematic for individuals on ethical grounds. Vegetarians and vegans face what has been called the 'vegetarian's dilemma' [18] or the 'animal lovers' paradox' [19] when deciding what to feed their pets. While they want to do what is best for their pet, they also see a wrong in the slaughter of animals to produce food. ...
... This indicates that people are more willing to take up plant-based diets themselves but might be reluctant to feed it to their pets. This is likely to create a dilemma for those who abstain from meat, or otherwise recognize the problems of conventional meat production-on one hand, they are likely to have ethical objections to animal agriculture, yet on the other hand they are not willing to feed their companions a plant-based diet because they see it as a necessary part of their nutrition [18,19]. We contend that cultivated meat has the potential to solve this dilemma by providing a nutritionally adequate food that is not associated with the ethical problems of farmed meat, yet still satisfying the (perceived) nutritional needs of pets. ...
Article
Full-text available
The number of people reducing their meat consumption due to ethical and environmental concerns is growing. However, meat reducers sometimes care for omnivorous or carnivorous pets, creating the ‘vegetarian’s dilemma’. Some meat-reducers opt to feed plant-based diets to companion animals, but others express reservations. Cultivated meat offers a possible third path, but consumer perceptions of cultivated meat as pet food have received little scholarly attention. Using survey data from 729 respondents, we analyzed consumers’ willingness to feed cultivated meat to companion animals, particularly with reference to their own current dietary practices, and their own willingness to eat cultivated meat. Though not all our respondents willing to eat cultivated meat were willing to feed it to their companions, a large majority were (81.4%, 193/237). However, for those unwilling to eat cultivated meat, the story was more complicated. Vegans and vegetarians were less likely to say they would eat cultivated meat (16.4%, 39/238) than meat-eating respondents (40.3%, 198/491). However, among vegans and vegetarians who would not consume cultivated meat, the majority (55.9%, 86/154) indicated that they would still feed it to their pets. Among meat-eating respondents, only a small minority (9.6%, 11/114) unwilling to eat cultivated meat would feed it to their pets. Consequently, we suggest that the potential market for cultivated meat for pet food is markedly different from the potential market for cultivated meat from human consumption. A key concern among our respondents about feeding cultivated meat to pets was a worry that it was not healthy, indicating that there may be easy gains in cultivated pet food’s uptake through messaging relating to safety and nutritional completeness.
... Since animal welfare is a moral issue [51], people's attitudes towards it can vary depending on their culture, area of residence, time, or personal factors [52,53]. Studies in the related literature pointed out that vegetarians based on animal welfare believe that there is a solid emotional bond between humans and animals [54]. Some people have an attitude of rejecting animal products based on animal welfare or health factors [55] and believe that animals have the same perceptive capacity as consumers and should be treated with animal welfare value [56]. ...
... When a product's ability to improve animal welfare is more in line with consumer expectations, consumers are more likely to have a positive attitude towards the product; relatively, producers of plant-based meat alternatives are more able to use animal welfare value to predict consumers' attitude towards their products. The plantbased meat alternative production process does not harm animals, which can effectively improve consumer acceptance of products [2,54]. As a result, business operators must advertise products from an animal-friendly perspective to help differentiate the market from other meat products. ...
Article
Full-text available
Extreme weather conditions have intensified due to manufactured environmental damage in recent years. To reduce the environmental impact on the Earth, many consumers seek to change their dietary patterns to protect the environment and voluntarily switch to a vegetarian diet. Past studies have found that the transition from nonvegetarian to vegetarian is not easy, but promoting the consumption of alternative foods such as plant-based meat alternatives should help consumers gradually reduce their dependence on meat during the transition period of changing their eating habits. This study was designed to apply the value-attitude-behavior model (VAB) to study the consumption attitude and behavior of novel and environmentally friendly foods such as plant-based meat alternatives, and the novelty of plant-based meat alternatives was included as an intervening variable for discussion. In this study, 376 valid questionnaires were collected from college students in Taiwan, and the recovery rate of valid questionnaires was 94%. It was found from the analysis of results that perceptions of green value and animal welfare value had a significantly positive effect on attitude, while attitude and product knowledge also had a significant positive effect on behavior; however, the novelty of plant-based meat alternatives products did not have an interference effect on the relationship between product knowledge and behavior. Based on the research findings of this study, it is suggested that when introducing plant-based meat alternatives products, food companies should not only let consumers understand that they are based on environmental friendliness and animal welfare values but also enhance the marketing and promotion of product knowledge to increase consumers’ confidence in purchasing plant-based meat alternatives and reduce their consumption concerns.
... Research on those following a vegan diet because of health beliefs almost solely focuses on diet. Health vegans believe that a vegan diet could prevent illness and increase personal wellbeing (Janssen et al., 2016;Rothgerber, 2013) or is a way to weight-loss (Costa et al., 2019). Environmental values include concerns about climate change, ecological balance, and resource scarcity (e.g., Hoffman et al., 2013;Kerschke-Risch, 2015;Rothgerber, 2013). ...
... Health vegans believe that a vegan diet could prevent illness and increase personal wellbeing (Janssen et al., 2016;Rothgerber, 2013) or is a way to weight-loss (Costa et al., 2019). Environmental values include concerns about climate change, ecological balance, and resource scarcity (e.g., Hoffman et al., 2013;Kerschke-Risch, 2015;Rothgerber, 2013). Notably, these values and beliefs are not that clear-cut. ...
Article
Full-text available
While veganism has been growing and receiving increasing attention, there is a gap on how factors such as health and environmental beliefs and anti-speciesism values, that create attitude towards their diets, influence their vegan behaviour. Furthermore, the role of social stigma experienced by vegans has not been examined within this context. Building on the value-attitude-behaviour model, the present study addresses this gap by conceptualizing these different streams of variables to build a testable conceptual framework for understanding how these factors contribute to maintaining a vegan lifestyle. The study uses structural equation modelling to analyse the data on 315 vegan consumers, testing the framework and its variables. The study shows that the value‐attitude‐behaviour model can successfully be applied to vegan behaviour. The findings show that anti-speciesism values are strong predictors of a positive attitude toward a vegan diet. Furthermore, social stigma does not inhibit consumers from maintaining a vegan lifestyle. Ultimately, the study contributes to a novel multifaceted model for understanding veganism in broader terms, allowing for the examination of other influencing factors on a complex outcome. The findings are useful for policymakers and marketing practitioners to engage in understanding behavioural segments.
... However, we find differences between both positions; for example, people with a vegan diet have a higher moral motivation than vegetarians. It is true that both positions share ethical, environmental or health reasons as some of their main motivators (Fox & Ward, 2008;Hoffman et al., 2013;Janssen et al., 2016;Rothgerber, 2013). However, veganism arises as a moral imperative recognizing the idea that there should not be any ethical justification for the use of non-human animals as food, thus ruling out the positions of vegetarians, flexitarians, pescatarians, etc., who can selectively consume animal-based products. ...
... Así, las personas con una alimentación vegana tienen una mayor motivación moral que las vegetarianas. Es cierto que ambas posturas comparten entre sus principales motivadores las razones éticas, ambientales o de salud (Fox & Ward, 2008;Hoffman et al., 2013;Janssen et al., 2016;Rothgerber, 2013). Sin embargo, el veganismo surge como un imperativo moral donde se reconoce la idea de que no debería existir ninguna justificación ética para el uso alimentario de los animales no humanos, descartando, por tanto, las posturas de vegetarianos/as, flexitarianos/as, pescitarianos/as, etc. que pueden consumir selectivamente productos de origen animal. ...
Article
The aim of this study is to adapt and validate the Dietarian Identity Questionnaire (DIQ) into the Spanish context. In an initial study, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed, obtaining good validity and goodness-of-fit indices (CMIN/DF = 2.026; CFI = .976; NNFI = .972; SRMR = .054 and RMSEA = .057). In a second study, evidence of validity based on the relationship with other variables was analysed using the ‘Meaning of Food in Life’ questionnaire. Correlations were made and differences between people with a vegan (N = 43), vegetarian (N = 44) and omnivorous (N = 115) diet were analysed. The results indicate that vegans and vegetarians differ from omnivores in all identity factors (p = ≤ .001). In addition, differences were found between vegans and vegetarians in the Public Regard (p = .035), Outgroup Regard (p = .036) and Moral Motivation (p = .036) factors. DIQ is a good instrument that can be used in studies on food choices and sustainability.
... As a rule, it seems that perception of the environment is also affected by attitudes towards animals. Pifer, Shimizu and Pifer [41] found a significant relationship between concern for the environment and opposition to experiments on animals and concern for their rights in eleven out of fifteen countries. ...
... These findings are supported by a number of studies showing that pet owners demonstrate more empathy towards animals and greater opposition to cruelty towards them [32,34,35]. In addition, in some studies the proportion of pet owners was higher among a group of meat-avoiders [39,41] and that the main cause of vegetarian nutrition was animal welfare [36,37,40]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background The livestock industry has numerous impacts on the environment. The aim of this study is to examine the level of knowledge, awareness and behavior on topics related to environmental pollution caused by industrial animal food production and to determine whether there is a relationship among them. Methods Cross-sectional study using an online questionnaire. 361 students were asked about their knowledge, attitudes, and behavior related to the environmental impact caused by livestock industry. The data were analyzed using correlations, t-tests for independent samples, and linear regression models. Results Students have almost no knowledge about the environmental impact of livestock industry, their attitudes are moderately pro-environmental, yet they are not strict about them. Students with higher levels of environmental knowledge demonstrated more pro-environmental attitudes and behavior (r = 0.33, p < 0.001; r = 0.36, p < 0.001 respectively); attitudes mediate the relationship between level of knowledge and behavior with respect to environmental pollution caused by the livestock industry (Adj. R2 =0.28, p < 0.001). Significant differences were found between participants who rear animals and participants who don't, in the level of knowledge (t = 3.78, p < 0.001), attitudes (t = 3.04, p < 0.01), and behavior (t = 2.33, p < 0.05). Conclusions These findings are in line with other studies, which showed that some consumers are concerned about production of animal foods but their knowledge on this topic is very limited, and most continue to consume animal products without any intention of reducing consumption. There is a need to raise awareness of the environmental and health impacts caused by livestock industry. An introductory course on environmental science should be integrated into different academic study programs. Further research should be conducted among additional population sectors. Key messages Students have almost no knowledge about the environmental impacts of the food they consume. There is a need to develop campaigns to raise awareness of environmental impacts of food.
... Animal-related motives of choosing veg*an diets are consumers' considerations toward animal protection, animal welfare (Radnitz et al., 2015), animal rights, animal respect (Regan, 1984) and speciesism (Singer, 1975). Environment-related or ecological motives, could be named as consumers' considerations towards environment sustainability or resource scarcity (Rothgerber, 2013). The religious beliefs choosing veg*an diets, such as Hinduism rooted in animal-related motives (Hamilton, 2000). ...
... Conclusion The three significant motives for following veg*an diets are (1) animal-related, (2) healthrelated and (3) environment-related reasons (Dyett et al., 2013;Hamilton, 2000;Janssen et al., 2016;Kerschke-Risch, 2015;Radnitz et al., 2015;Rothgerber, 2013). Studies revealed the fact that the duration of following veg*an diets is associated with the category of motives. ...
... As a rule, it seems that perception of the environment is also affected by attitudes towards animals. Pifer, Shimizu and Pifer [41] found a significant relationship between concern for the environment and opposition to experiments on animals and concern for their rights in eleven out of fifteen countries. ...
... These findings are supported by a number of studies showing that pet owners demonstrate more empathy towards animals and greater opposition to cruelty towards them [32,34,35]. In addition, in some studies the proportion of pet owners was higher among a group of meat-avoiders [39,41] and that the main cause of vegetarian nutrition was animal welfare [36,37,40]. ...
Article
Full-text available
The livestock industry has numerous and diverse impacts on the environment. In a cross-sectional study using an online questionnaire, 361 students were asked about their knowledge, attitudes, and behavior related to the environmental impact caused by livestock industry. The data were analyzed using correlations, t-tests for independent samples, and linear regression models. We found that students have almost no knowledge about the environmental impact of the food they consume, their attitudes are moderately pro-environmental, yet they are not strict about pro-environmental behavior. Students with higher levels of environmental knowledge demonstrated more pro-environmental attitudes and behavior; attitudes mediate the relationship between level of knowledge and behavior with respect to environmental pollution caused by the livestock industry. In addition, participants that rear/reared animals demonstrated more knowledge and pro-environmental attitudes and behavior, and women demonstrated more pro-environmental attitudes and behavior than men. There is a need to raise awareness of the environmental and health impacts caused by livestock industry. An introductory course on environmental science should be integrated into different academic study programs. Further research should be conducted among additional population sectors.
... Accordingly, it is unsurprising that ethically motivated and health-motivated vegetarians report having converted to vegetarianism through different processes and employ different rhetorical strategies when explaining their food choices to others (Jabs et al. 1998;Wilson et al. 2004). Moreover, compared to health-motivated vegetarians, ethically motivated vegetarians hold stronger attitudes toward animal rights, attribute greater mind to animals, feel greater disgust toward meat, and set higher standards of dietary adherence for themselves (Jabs et al. 1998;Janssen et al. 2016;Rothgerber 2013Rothgerber , 2014aRozin et al. 1997). Motivation also may predict the maintenance of vegetarianism over time, as people who initially became vegetarian for ethical reasons report having followed their diets for a longer duration than do those who became vegetarian for health reasons (Hoffman et al. 2013). ...
... In order to test my hypotheses more precisely, I excluded mixedmotive vegetarians from analyses, including only vegetarians who nominated animals, health, or the environment as their primary motivation. Some research (e.g., Rothgerber 2013Rothgerber , 2014a has begun to examine mixed-motive vegetarians, comparing them to vegetarians who nominate ethics or health as their primary motivation. Still, additional work is needed to understand how mixed-motive vegetarians form a hierarchy of their various dietary motivations, acquire and drop different motivations over time, draw upon certain motivations over others across varying contexts, and so forth. ...
Article
Full-text available
Many studies have demonstrated psychological differences between ethically motivated and health-motivated vegetarians. Adopting an ethical-health dichotomy in studying dietary motivation, however, may overlook meaningful variance between vegetarians motivated by different types of ethical concerns—namely, those related to animals and the environment. Through two preregistered studies, I compared dietary goal orientations, disgust toward meat, and dietary adherence between vegetarians motivated by animals, health, and the environment. In Study 1 (N = 361), I found that environmentally motivated vegetarians resembled animal-motivated vegetarians in construing their diets as a means of achieving more prosocial and moral, but less personal, goals than did health-motivated vegetarians. In Study 2 (N = 562), however, I found that environmentally motivated vegetarians resembled health-motivated vegetarians in reporting less disgust toward meat and lower dietary adherence than did animal-motivated vegetarians. Stronger feelings of disgust toward meat explained why animal-motivated vegetarians exhibited the most stringent dietary adherence. Distinguishing between various types of ethical motivation may reveal more nuanced insights into eating behavior.
... [4][5][6] It has been suggested that eliminating meat from the diet is more prevalent among pet owners than for the general public. [7][8][9] Many of these meat-avoiding individuals have a moral dilemma regarding the husbandry of carnivorous pets: they avoid animal products in their own diet, but they live with pets that rely on nutritional sustenance from products derived from other animals. 7 Interest in, and availability of, plant-based diets are growing in popularity in the North American pet food market, 10,11 but there are little data to support the benefits of feeding plant-based diets to omnivorous and carnivorous pets. ...
... [7][8][9] Many of these meat-avoiding individuals have a moral dilemma regarding the husbandry of carnivorous pets: they avoid animal products in their own diet, but they live with pets that rely on nutritional sustenance from products derived from other animals. 7 Interest in, and availability of, plant-based diets are growing in popularity in the North American pet food market, 10,11 but there are little data to support the benefits of feeding plant-based diets to omnivorous and carnivorous pets. For dogs, most essential nutrients can be obtained from plant sources. ...
Article
Full-text available
... Considering the presence of advocates with different diets in the ARM, both the "meat paradox" (Loughnan et al., 2010), where people who do not want to hurt or kill animals nonetheless eat them, and the "vegetarian or vegan paradox," where animal-based products (e.g., milk, eggs) are used either for one's or one's household (e.g., children, companion animals) consumption (Rothgerber, 2013(Rothgerber, , 2014a. In all of these situations, an internal conflict might arise due to the inconsistency between cognition (i.e., beliefs, attitudes) and behavior. ...
... Participants were asked to select which diet applies to them: omnivore, vegetarian, vegan, or other (as in Rothgerber, 2013). To reduce any potential biases, we cleaned our data as follows: if a participant in the "other" category claimed to eat animals and did not mention being a vegetarian, we categorized them as "omnivore," whereas if the participant reported consuming animal derivatives but claimed to be vegetarian, then we categorized them as "vegetarian." ...
Article
Full-text available
Dietary changes towards veganism offer a solution to tackling not only unethical nonhuman animal exploitation but also to minimizing several environmental and health problems faced worldwide. This research examines what challenges and characteristics are associated with dietary choices among animal rights advocates (ARA) in Spain. The characteristics we test for include (a) general environmental and health awareness, (b) commitment to the animal rights movement, and (c) perceptions of animal emotions. From a sample of 235 ARA, our results showed that the challenges related to diet vary largely across different diet types, with the most common among vegans being a perceived lack of societal support, whereas for omnivores, the taste of animal-based products. On average, vegan ARA were found to hold both the highest levels of environmental awareness and commitment to the animal rights movement, while omnivores were least likely to draw similarities between nonhuman animal and human emotions.
... Consumption of an entirely plant-based (vegan) diet that avoids consuming any ingredients that come from an animal has increased in popularity in human nutrition because of the potential positive impacts on the environment and overall health (Berschneider, 2002;Michel, 2006;Dodd et al., 2018;Eisen and Brown, 2022;Feigin et al., 2023;Knight, 2023). As more pet guardians switch to a vegan diet, the potential for moral conflicts has developed when it comes to feeding their pets because most commercial diets are formulated using animalbased ingredients (Rothgerber, 2013;Dodd et al., 2018). A survey conducted in 2019, indicated that three quarters of vegan pet guardians would reportedly feed a plant-based diet to their pets if one was available to meet their needs (Dodd et al., 2019). ...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose Pet guardians are increasingly seeking vegan dog foods. However, research on the impact of these diets on gastrointestinal (GI) physiology and health is limited. In humans, vegan diets modify the GI microbiota, increasing beneficial digestive microorganisms. This study aimed to examine the canine fecal microbiota in response to a vegan diet compared to an animal-based diet. Methods Sixty-one client-owned healthy adult dogs completed a randomized, double-blinded longitudinal study. Dogs were randomly assigned into two groups that were fed either a commercial extruded animal-based diet (MEAT, n = 30) or an experimental extruded vegan diet (PLANT, n = 31) for 12 weeks. Fecal collections occurred at the start of the experimental period and after 3 months of exclusively feeding either diet. Bacterial DNA was extracted from the feces, and the V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene was amplified using PCR and sequenced on Illumina MiSeq. Beta-diversity was measured using Jaccard and Bray–Curtis distances, and the PERMANOVA was used to assess for differences in fecal microbiota within and between groups. Alpha-diversity indices for richness, evenness, and diversity, as well as relative abundance, were calculated and compared between groups. Results Beta-diversity differences occurred between diet groups at exit time-point with differences on Bray–Curtis distances at the family and genus levels (p = 0.007 and p = 0.001, respectively), and for the Jaccard distance at the family and genus level (p = 0.006 and p = 0.011, respectively). Significant differences in alpha-diversity occurred when comparing the PLANT to the MEAT group at the exit time-point with the PLANT group having a lower evenness (p = 0.012), but no significant differences in richness (p = 0.188), or diversity (p = 0.06). At exit-timepoint, compared to the MEAT group, the relative abundance of Fusobacterium, Bacteroides, and Campylobacter was lower in the PLANT group. The relative abundance of Fusobacterium decreased over time in the PLANT group, while no change was observed in the MEAT group. Conclusion These results indicate that vegan diets may change the canine gut microbiota. Future studies are warranted to confirm our results and determine long-term effects of vegan diets on the canine gut microbiome.
... Relational approaches to human-CA feeding can be found in empirical literature from the fields of social psychology and food ethics that have explored the values and practices of vegetarian and vegan dog guardians. Guardians following a plant-based diet may face ethical conflicts and guilt regarding animal welfare -named the 'vegetarian's dilemma' (Rothgerber, 2013) -when feeding animal-based diets to their companions (Milburn, 2017). This has been unpacked by Erika Cudworth, whose qualitative investigation of carnism -'the belief system that conditions us to eat certain animals' ( Joy, 2020: p. 19) -and CA feeding revealed antagonisms, anxieties and gradients of ethical choices for veg(etari)an owners who feed dogs meat, thus highlighting the ambivalences of 'ethical relating' (Cudworth, 2016: 240). ...
... It was assumed, based on previous research, that the majority of respondents feeding a plant-based diet to their pet followed a vegetarian or vegan lifestyle themselves (Dodd et al., 2019a). It is thus possible that, given the strong affinity of meat-avoiders for companion animals (Rothgerber, 2013;Herzog Jr et al., 1991), that making end of life decisions may be more drawn out, resulting in a longer lifespan. In contrast, vegetarians and vegans may have greater concern for animal suffering and greater empathy for animals (Filippi et al., 2010) when compared to non-vegetarians, which would suggest compassionate consideration of euthanasia when dogs enter end-of-life criteria. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Some dog owners elect to feed their dog a plant-based food either as part of or for their entire dietary intake. Being omnivores or facultative carnivores, a strictly plant-based diet is not the natural type of food dogs evolved to consume, leaving some question as to whether this feeding management strategy is safe and healthy for dogs. Objectives This study surveyed owner perceptions of health and wellbeing of dogs and compared between those fed meat-based and plant-based diets. Methods A web-based questionnaire was distributed to pet owners to collect data on dog characteristics, husbandry, health and wellbeing. Univariate comparisons between diet groups was made by chi square analyses or Kaplan-Meier tests as appropriate, with a significance cut-off value of 0.05. Multivariate models were negative binomial and logistic regression for count and categorical data, respectively. Results Owners feeding plant-based diets to their dog reported fewer health disorders, specifically with respect to ocular or gastrointestinal and hepatic disorders. Dog longevity was reported to be greater for dogs fed plant-based diets. Owners feeding plant-based diets to their dogs relied less on veterinary associates for nutrition information, versus dog owners feeding meat-based diets. Conclusions Dog owners feeding a plant-based diet did not perceive adverse health effects in their dogs. The results might suggest an association between feeding a plant-based diet and perceived health and longevity, however inherent bias and limitations associated with surveys of owner perception must be considered, and objective research is required to determine if plant-based diets truly affect canine health.
... Vegans also exhibit an even stronger opposition to group-based inequality and social dominance, and they recognize greater similarities between humans and non-human animals in terms of their emotional experiences and mental capacities. 16,[20][21][22][23] The findings of these studies thus tentatively suggest that vegetarians and vegans hold similar moral motivations to abstain from meat consumption, yet vegans apply these values more broadly and consistently across their consumption behavior and lifestyle, moving beyond merely meat consumption. ...
... Studies taking into account sociodemographics find a higher share of women amongst vegetarians/vegans [18][19][20][21][22][23]. Ruby and Heine [24] as well as Modlinska et al. [25] identify different perceptions of meat eaters and vegetarians and conclude that being a vegetarian can make one appear more virtuous but less masculine. ...
Article
Full-text available
Previous studies have identified health, the environment and animal welfare as key motivations for becoming and remaining vegetarian/vegan. However, the idea of vegetarianism/veganism appears to have interesting facets that go beyond those drivers. This paper describes and examines this attraction. Twenty-six in depth interviews and two group discussions were conducted using the Morphological Psychology approach, which allows the revelation of conscious as well as unconscious drivers based on the detailed narrations of the interviewees. We conclude that the attractiveness of vegetarianism/veganism cannot only be explained by the classical and conscious motivations of a meatless or animal-free diet such as improving health and animal welfare. It also comprises less conscious or unconscious drivers of vegetarianism/veganism such as empowerment and enrichment, regaining autonomy and creating identity and superiority in addition to and partly through liberation from a meat production system which is perceived as destructive and threatening.
... Health concerns and sustainability/environmental preservation are considered the main motivations for this shifting away from animal products [7,8]. Pet owners, who avoid eating animals often feed or are interested in feeding plant-based or vegan diets to their pets and report feelings of guilt and internal conflict regarding feeding animal products to their pets [9,10]. However, in terms of sustainability, it would be preferable to use rye as a cereal with a low negative impact on the environment and, moreover small amounts of animal products like feather meal that would otherwise remain unused. ...
Article
Full-text available
Cereals with low environmental input like rye and animal by-products which cannot be used for human food like feather meal are receiving growing interest as sustainable feed sources. Thus, eight Beagle dogs were included in a 4 x 4 Latin Square design and received a vegetarian basic diet or the same diets supplemented with hydrolyzed feather meal (2.7%) and either 20.1% of corn meal, 60.4% of fermented rye or 20.1% of rye as is basis (moisture content of the diets about 42%). Compared to other groups the dry matter (DM) content of feces from dogs fed the basic diet was higher (30.0%, p < 0.05), while dogs fed the basic diet + rye had the lowest DM-content (26.5%, p < 0.05). However, the fecal scores were considered to be within an acceptable range (well-formed and firm). Starch digestibility was lower (p < 0.05) for dogs fed the basic diet + corn meal. The dogs showed a high and identical acceptance (scoring of food intake) of the experimental diets. As a comparable quality of feces and a high nutrient digestibility were observed when rye was used in the experimental diets — it can be considered an alternative carbohydrate source in dog foods.
... Nevertheless, it has been suggested that feeding PB diets to cats may predispose them to health disorders, including lower urinary tract diseases [21,22]. Other studies have investigated the motivations and attitudes of cat owners towards feeding their cat, finding that meat-abstainers were the only ones who fed their cats PB diets, and that their impetus to do so was based largely on ethics or morality [17,20,23]. Currently, only one study investigating owner perception of health in cats fed PB has been published [20]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Cats, being obligate carnivores, have unique dietary requirements for nutrients most commonly found in dietary ingredients of animal origin. As such, feeding a diet devoid of animal-derived ingredients has been postulated as a possible cause of nutrient imbalances and adverse health outcomes. A small proportion of cat owners feed strictly plant-based diets to the cats in their care, yet the health and wellness of cats fed these diets has not been well documented. Results A total of 1325 questionnaires were complete enough for inclusion. The only exclusion criterion was failure to answer all questions. Most cats, 65% (667/1026), represented in the survey were fed a meat-based diet and 18.2% (187/1026) were fed a plant-based diet, with the rest fed either a combination of plant-based with meat-based (69/1026, 6.7%) or indeterminable (103/1026, 10%). Cat age ranged from 4 months to 23 years, with a median of 7 years, and was not associated with diet type. No differences in reported lifespan were detected between diet types. Fewer cats fed plant-based diets reported to have gastrointestinal and hepatic disorders. Cats fed plant-based diets were reported to have more ideal body condition scores than cats fed a meat-based diet. More owners of cats fed plant-based diets reported their cat to be in very good health. Conclusions Cat owner perception of the health and wellness of cats does not appear to be adversely affected by being fed a plant-based diet. Contrary to expectations, owners perceived no body system or disorder to be at particular risk when feeding a plant-based diet to cats. This study collected information from cat owners and is subject to bias, as well as methodological limitations. Further research is warranted to determine if these results are replicable in a prospective investigation.
... It has been suggested that the over-representation of women in vegetarianism (all vegetarian diets) may be due to body image and weight concerns (Bas et al., 2005), but our results do not support this hypothesis. We could therefore refer instead to the question of gender-differentiated representations of food, since meat has long represented male strength and dominance, and is a symbol of masculinity, while fruit and vegetables are generally associated with weakness and a feminine identity (Fraser et al., 2000;Gossard & York, 2003;Rothgerber, 2013;Ruby & Heine, 2011). ...
Article
Vegetarianism, which is increasingly widespread in Western societies, is underpinned by various motivations (ethical, environmental, health concerns …) and the question of its association with eating disorders continues to divide the literature. This cross-sectional study aimed to explore and compare eating motives/attitudes and bodily preoccupations of vegetarian and omnivorous participants from the general population. Forty-nine vegetarians and 52 omnivores, aged between 18 and 70 years, completed a battery of questionnaires including sociodemographic characteristics, Body Mass Indexes (BMI - current, ideal, lifetime lowest, and lifetime highest), the Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ), the Eating Attitudes Test-26 (EAT-26), and the Body Shape Questionnaire (BSQ). Compared to omnivores, vegetarians reported lower current (p = .017), ideal (p = .009), and lifetime lowest (p = .005) BMIs, more motivations related to health (p = .001) and natural content (p < .0001), but less weight control motivations (p = .015). While no differences were observed in EAT-26 scores, vegetarians had lower BSQ total scores (p = .043), and lower scores on the Body Dissatisfaction related to Lower body parts (p = .025) and Unsuited Cognitions and Behaviors (p = .015) subscales compared to omnivores. Separate gender comparisons revealed that these differences existed only among women. Hierarchical regressions revealed that the natural content motivation was the strongest positive statistical predictor of the vegetarian group (Expβ = 1.18, p = .002), while the weight control motivation was a negative statistical predictor (Expβ = .710, p = .023). Results demonstrated that vegetarians expressed motivation for a healthy and natural diet, and were less concerned about controlling their weight than the omnivores. Vegetarian women had lower BMIs but expressed fewer psychological concerns associated with eating disorders than omnivorous women. Vegetarian diets appeared to be associated with health benefits and less body and weight concerns, particularly among women in the general population.
... Piazza found that consumers frequently bring up the "4N"s in favor of meat, namely Natural, Normal, Necessary, and Nice, to defend their choice of eating meat [91]. Other studies show that consumers justify meat consumption by bringing up hedonistic, nutritional, evolutionary, or social arguments [47,91,98]. In addition, researchers have found another commonly used strategy, i.e., the ignorance strategy. ...
Article
Full-text available
More and more consumers, at least in Western developed countries, are attentive to the sustainability aspects of their food, one of which concerns animal welfare. The conflict of harming an animal for the joy of eating meat causes a moral dilemma, affecting consumers’ reactions to, and choices of, animal-friendly products. This systematic review identified 86 studies from Scopus and Web of Science. The review outlines: (1) What are the personal antecedents among consumers regarding moral conflicts?; (2) In what situation do moral conflicts occur in consumer food choice?; (3) How do consumers emotionally experience the moral dilemma?; (4) How do consumers resolve moral conflicts over animal products? Researchers have studied personal factors and situational factors that arouse consumers’ moral dilemma and how the dilemma is solved, during which emotions and dissonance come into play. When synthesizing these findings into a comprehensive model, we notice that the current research is lacking on how personal factors change and interact with situations, which limits the understanding of the real-life context of consumers’ moral dilemma as well as their choices of animal-friendly products. More in-depth studies are needed to find situational factors that contribute to this complex psychological process.
... Given that definitions of ethical motivation have varied across studies on vegetarianism (Rosenfeld & Burrow, 2017b), I furthermore assessed ethical motivation directly through this single-item statement in order to measure how participants themselves construe ethical motivation in dieting, theorizing that it would be very similar to animal welfare motivation. Prior studies on vegetarianism (e.g., Rothgerber, 2013Rothgerber, , 2014 likewise have used this methodology to assess ethical motivation. Ethical Motivation and Vegetarian Dieting: The Underlying Role of Anti-speciesist Attitudes Similarly, I operationalized speciesism differently in this second study than in study 1, using Caviola and colleagues' (2018) scale in this study but Dhont and colleagues' (2014) scale in study 1. ...
Article
The most common motivation people have for becoming vegetarian is ethical concern about using animals for food. One ideology called speciesism—which entails assigning different moral worth to different species of animals—is thought to play a central role in promoting ethical vegetarianism. Following a vegetarian diet provides a means of opposing speciesism, proclaiming to oneself and the public that humans should not embody an inherently higher moral status than other animals. Yet the extent to which speciesism and dietary motivations exert direct effects on the decision to go vegetarian remain unknown. Through two preregistered studies, I investigated links between speciesism, ethical dietary motivation, and vegetarian status. In study 1 (n = 576), I found that ethical motivation partially mediated the link between speciesism and vegetarian versus meat-eater status. However, the direct effect of speciesism on vegetarian status remained large, such that rejection of speciesism was a much stronger predictor of participants’ vegetarian status than was their reported level of ethical dietary motivation. In study 2 (n = 201), I found that although vegans reported having greater ethical dietary motivation than vegetarians did, this effect disappeared when controlling for speciesism. Thus, vegans’ greater rejection of speciesism explained why they were more ethically motivated than vegetarians were. These studies suggest that beliefs about speciesism may predict certain eating behaviors more robustly than ethical motivation does. Accordingly, in studying eating behavior, it may be valuable to consider not only what motivations people report for their food choices but also the ideological notions they bring to the table.
... Although the above definition of veganism only allows for ethical vegans, a growing number of individuals who consider themselves vegan are driven by other motivations; two of the more common ones focus on the positive impact a plant-based diet might have on their health or the environment (Kerschke-Risch, 2015). The health motive includes the notion that a vegan diet is better for one's health than the omnivore diet, because it prevents illness and increases personal fitness and well-being (Rothgerber, 2013). The environmental motive is fairly broad and can include reasons such as concern about global warming, ecological balance, resource depletion, and planetary health (Kerschke-Risch, 2015;Bogueva and Phau, 2016). ...
Article
Full-text available
Consumers increasingly embrace veganism, thereby creating lucrative markets and the need for marketers to understand the diverse motivations for adopting this diet and/or lifestyle. Considering, however, the widespread confusion and/or disparity displayed by consumers concerning the definition of veganism, this empirical study investigates the importance of (1) using objective measures rather than self-identification to assess diets; (2) distinguishing among the different motivations that drive consumers to embrace a vegan diet and/or lifestyle; and (3) distinguishing among the diverse types of vegans when studying how consumer attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors differ. The data analyses show that individuals are motivated by different reasons to follow a plant-based diet and/or lifestyle. The findings also show that ethical vegans (i.e., individuals who are vegan “for the animals” and embrace animal rights) display lower levels of speciesism, which means that ethical vegans reject the assumption of human superiority that leads to the exploitation of animals. Ethical vegans also display higher levels of SDO-Egalitarianism, which means they are more likely than other types of vegans to embrace equality and believe that society should become more egalitarian; apparently this concern also includes the standing of animals in society. Thus, lumping all subjects who follow a vegan diet into one single group can lead to research outcomes that are invalid and/or misleading as they ignore real differences among the different types of vegans.
... This confirms earlier findings that men are more attached to meat as compared to women [8]. Moreover, more than women, men believe that a meal without meat is not a proper meal [57], that meat eating is 'natural' for humans to do [58], and that it makes them strong and 'manly' [59]. In general, people associate meat with masculinity [60], and vegetarianism with being less masculine [61,62]. ...
Article
Full-text available
This article highlights the importance of the dietary pattern of significant others in one’s social network to explain both individual meat consumption and vegaphobia, the negative and stigmatizing attitude toward vegetarianism and non-meat-eaters. Using survey data (N = 996), this study first contrasted convinced meat-eaters with non-meat eaters, or people who actively reduce or limit their meat consumption, in terms of different socio-demographic characteristics. Results showed that convinced meat eaters are more often male. A negligible effect on meat consumption was found for education, and age differences were not significant. Next, attention was paid to the social context of meat consumption. Specifically, results of a logistic regression analysis showed that a person’s meat consumption is considerably lower when one of their household members is vegetarian. This was also the case, but to a lesser extent, if people’s social circle included a vegetarian friend or family member. Similar results were found when looking at the linear correlates of vegaphobia using ordinary least squares regression (OLS). Vegaphobes were more often male and lower-educated. In addition, vegaphobia was more common among older persons and convinced meat eaters. Moreover, vegaphobia was less common among people who had a vegetarian in their household or groups of friends. The article ends with a discussion on the importance of studying the social environment in meat consumption and attitudes toward vegetarianism. Policy implications and directions for future research are discussed.
... This is a very human but unsupportable sort of inference, a confused twist on "ought implies can." It is illustrated vividly by the attempt of some vegans to feed their cats vegan diets (Rothgerber 2013;Solon 2018), a practice that seems extremely risky given the limited research on feline vegan nutrition (Knight and Leitsberger 2016). ...
Article
Full-text available
I claim that there is pro tanto moral reason for parents to not raise their child on a vegan diet because a vegan diet bears a risk of harm to both the physical and the social well-being of children. After giving the empirical evidence from nutrition science and sociology that supports this claim, I turn to the question of how vegan parents should take this moral reason into account. Since many different moral frameworks have been used to argue for veganism, this is a complex question. I suggest that, on some of these moral frameworks, the moral reason that some parents have for not raising their child on a vegan diet on account of this risk is plausibly as strong as the reason they have for raising their child on a vegan diet. In other words, the moral reason I outline is weighty enough to justify some vegan parents in plausibly finding it permissible to not raise their child on a vegan diet.
... Given that definitions of ethical motivation have varied across studies on vegetarianism (Rosenfeld & Burrow, 2017b), I furthermore assessed ethical motivation directly through this single-item statement in order to measure how participants themselves construe ethical motivation in dieting, theorizing that it would be very similar to animal welfare motivation. Prior studies on vegetarianism (e.g., Rothgerber, 2013Rothgerber, , 2014 likewise have used this methodology to assess ethical motivation. Ethical Motivation and Vegetarian Dieting: The Underlying Role of Anti-speciesist Attitudes Similarly, I operationalized speciesism differently in this second study than in study 1, using Caviola and colleagues' (2018) scale in this study but Dhont and colleagues' (2014) scale in study 1. ...
Preprint
** This is the accepted version of a manuscript that will appear in the journal, Anthrozoös ** --- Abstract: The most common motivation people have for becoming vegetarian is ethical concern about using animals for food. One ideology called speciesism—which entails assigning different moral worth to different species of animals—is thought to play a central role in promoting ethical vegetarianism. Following a vegetarian diet provides a means of opposing speciesism, proclaiming to oneself and the public that humans should not embody an inherently higher moral status than other animals. Yet the extents to which speciesism and dietary motivations exert direct effects on the decision to go vegetarian remain unknown. Through two preregistered studies, I investigated links between speciesism, ethical dietary motivation, and vegetarian status. In Study 1 (N = 576), I found that ethical motivation partially mediated the link between speciesism and vegetarian versus meat-eater status. However, the direct effect of speciesism on vegetarian status remained large, such that rejection of speciesism was a much stronger predictor of participants’ vegetarian status than was their reported level of ethical dietary motivation. In Study 2 (N = 201), I found that although vegans reported having greater ethical dietary motivation than vegetarians did, this effect disappeared when controlling for speciesism. Thus, vegans’ greater rejections of speciesism explained why they were more ethically motivated than vegetarians were. These studies suggest that beliefs about speciesism may predict certain eating behaviors more robustly than ethical motivation does. Accordingly, in studying eating behavior, it may valuable to consider not only what motivations people report for their food choices but also the ideological notions they bring to the table.
... Variations of this occurred in the top 40 words, including #vegetarian (12 th ), #veganfood (13 th ), and #veganfoodshare (29 th ). Several studies have identified health-related reasons as the main motivations for following a vegan diet (Dyett et al., 2013;Izmirli and Phillips, 2011;Kerschke-Risch, 2015;Radnitz, Beezhold, and DiMatteo, 2015;Rothgerber, 2013;Timko, Hormes, and Chubski, 2012;Waldmann et al., 2003). Because the most frequently shared experience on Instagram in the area of organic food is "health", it obviously raises a lot of interest among consumers who follow the vegan diet. ...
Article
Full-text available
In recent years, organic food production has been rising dramatically both in the EU and the USA. Previous research on consumer perception of organic food has mainly employed questionnaire survey methods. However, in the current age of the social network phenomenon, social media could prove to be a rich source of data. Increasingly, consumers are using social networks to share personal attitudes and experiences. This shared content could inform us about consumer opinions. Social network analysis and related sentiment analysis could allow identification of consumers’ experience and feelings about organic food. We investigated the perception of organic food using 1,325,435 Instagram interactions by 313,883 users worldwide. The data were recorded between July 4, 2016, and April 19, 2017. We identified three major hashtag areas (healthy, vegan, and clean food). The sentiment analysis revealed three dominant areas related to the #organicfood hashtag (feelings, taste, and appearance). Cluster analysis extracted four areas, as follows: Healthy living, Vegetarian, vegan, and raw diets, Clean eating, and Active healthy living. The mentioned communities are significant and useful at identification of customers values for farmers organic food product management and marketing communication in terms of product positioning.
... Compared to vegetarians, vegans are more concerned about the effects of their food choices on animal welfare, the environment, and political matters; support animal rights more strongly; are more disgusted by meat; and report ethical reasons for following their veg*n diet more commonly (Fiestas-Flores & Pyhälä, 2017;Haverstock & Forgays, 2012;Izmirli & Phillips, 2011;Kessler et al., 2016;Lund, McKeegan, Cribbin, & Sandøe, 2016;Rothgerber, 2015aRothgerber, , 2015bRuby, 2008;Ruby et al., 2011). These findings make it unsurprising that vegans perceive animals as more mentally and emotionally similar to humans and feel guiltier about feeding their pets a meat-based diet than do vegetarians (Rothgerber, 2013(Rothgerber, , 2014a(Rothgerber, , 2015b. Differences in moral judgment between vegetarians and vegans have been demonstrated through not only explicit self-reports but also neural responses: When viewing depictions of animal suffering, vegans exhibit greater activation of certain empathy-related brain regions than do vegetarians (Filippi et al., 2010;Filippi et al., 2013). ...
Article
Vegetarianism and veganism are often grouped together in nutritional and psychological investigations. Yet an emerging body of literature has highlighted that vegetarians and vegans differ along a number of neurological, attitudinal, and behavioral variables. In this research, I found that vegetarians and vegans exhibit different dietarian identity profiles. Compared to vegetarians, vegans saw their dietary patterns as more intertwined with their identity (higher centrality), had more positive feelings toward their dietary in-group (higher private regard), felt as if other people judge them more negatively for following their dietary patterns (lower public regard), evaluated out-group dieters more negatively (lower out-group regard), and had stronger motivations for following their dietary patterns (higher prosocial, personal, and moral motivations). By distinguishing between vegetarians and vegans more concretely, investigators can capture meaningful within-group heterogeneity in how people think, feel, and behave when it comes to eschewing animal products.
... While many people readily eat any animal product (i.e., red meat, poultry, fish, eggs, and dairy) and thus follow an unrestricted dietary pattern, other people follow various types of restricted diets, which can generally be characterized along a spectrum of animal-product exclusion (Beardsworth & Keil, 1992;Gill, 2015;Ruby, 2012). Though this spectrum is often divided into binary vegetarian and vegan categories (Rothgerber, 2013(Rothgerber, , 2014bRuby, 2012;Thomas, 2016), it further encompasses even more nuanced dietary pattern distinctions, such as lacto vegetarian, ovo vegetarian, lacto-ovo vegetarian, pollotarian, and pescatarian (see Gill, 2015). One can accordingly designate specific terms, such as "vegan identity" or "pescatarian identity," to capture the identities people construct around particular patterns of food choice. ...
Article
In navigating decisions about what to eat, people both construct and rely on a food-choice identity. Yet food choice is multifaceted, as people apply different dietary schemas to different types of food, engaging various domains of food-choice identity. In this paper, we focus on dietarian identity: one's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors with respect to consuming or eschewing animal products (here, pertaining to red meat, poultry, fish, eggs, and dairy). First, we draw upon Rosenfeld and Burrow's (2017a) Unified Model of Vegetarian Identity in order to develop a Dietarian Identity Questionnaire (DIQ). Second, we validate the DIQ's factor structure, construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and replicability. Lastly, we highlight directions for the use of the DIQ in future research.
Chapter
Full-text available
Motivation science is a field that delves into the very core of what drives us—why we do what we do. It's a field that bridges several disciplines, including psychology, neuroscience, economics, and even sociology. Researchers in this field are fascinated by the question of what makes people tick. In particular, they focus on understanding what motivates us and how we deal with challenges. Researchers investigate in depth the desires, needs, and goals that propel humans into action, and what processes they go through to translate those motivations into behaviors. They are also looking at how people persevere and overcome obstacles to achieving their goals.
Article
Cultivated meat is an alternative protein source developed to address the sustainability, public health and animal welfare concerns of conventional meat production. Hundreds of startups and academic institutions worldwide are working to make cultivated meat a cost-effective protein source for humans. However, cultivated meat could also be used to feed dogs and cats, contributing to solving the meat supply issues that the growing pet food market has been facing in recent years. The advantages of using cultivated meat as a protein source for pets would include a reduction of the environmental impact of pets' diets, decreased farm animal suffering and several benefits in the One Health framework, as cultivated meat-based pet food would significantly decrease the risk of spreading food safety pathogens, zoonotic diseases and resistant bacteria. The antibiotic-free manufacturing process and the aseptic conditions the cells require to grow in the bioreactors lead to these public health advantages. However, cultivated meat has never been produced at scale for human or pet consumption. Several technical challenges need to be overcome to make cultivated meat-based pet food prices accessible to consumers. As a novel ingredient, there is also no evidence of the effect of feeding cultivated meat to dogs and cats. In principle, cultivated meat can be both safe to be consumed long-term and nutritionally adequate – and with several possibilities for nutritional enhancement, potentially even superior to its conventional counterpart. However, the safety and nutritional soundness of cultivated meat-based products must be demonstrated by manufacturers to gain regulatory approval and favour consumer adoption. Veterinarians, veterinary nurses and technicians will play a critical role in the development of this new ingredient in many aspects, including product development, assessing safety and nutrition, conducting research and informing consumers. This review summarises the benefits and challenges of using cultivated meat as a pet food ingredient.
Chapter
Guardians face a dilemma when it comes to feeding companion animals. On the one hand, a meaty diet might seem suitable for dogs and cats. On the other hand, we are increasingly aware of the problems with animal agriculture. What is there to do? This chapter briefly introduces pet food, reviews the case against slaughter-based (‘conventional’) pet food, and explores the ethical credentials of three possible alternatives. These are plant-based pet food, invertebrate-based pet food, and cultivated pet food. While plant-based pet food provides a viable alternative to slaughter-based pet food in many cases, it may be unsuitable for at least some companions. The ethics of invertebrate-based pet food, meanwhile, are complicated, while cultivated pet food currently remains theoretical. Ultimately, exploring pet food as a collective, political question may lead to desirable, lasting solutions.
Article
The marketing of dog food influences pet-owners to nurture the ‘carnivorous’ nature of the dog, keeping animal-based protein central to the industry. Alas, dog food has a significant impact on welfare. Consumers are aware of this impact, shifting the industry towards alternative pet food movements such as Open Farm, the first certified humane food. This article examines the material and discursive practices through which ‘humaneness’ is constituted as a quality within the humane pet food supply chain and how it reinforces embedded animal hierarchies. By reviewing the marketing and history of commercial dog food production, I show how ‘caring’ for the carnivorous dog lays the framework for killing. I use Open Farm's transparency tool to trace the value chain and compare it with the imagery, discursive claims, and material practices found within the Global Animal Partnership standards. I argue that instead of questioning animal-based protein, humane certification creates an alternative in which the pet owner could still ‘care’ for the wildness of their domesticated dog while simultaneously ‘caring’ for farmed animals. Thus, it reinforces the hierarchies of the industry. Additionally, the validity of the humane claims depends on the animals’ charisma and proximity to humans. In other words, marketing in the humane dog food supply chain creates animal–animal positionalities, in which the animals’ care or killability is mediated through the humans’ supply chain and marketing. However, as I show with interview data, the hierarchies are fragile and must be continuously reinforced, as animals can slip into different positions. Their proximity to humans alters their positionality and their killability.
Article
Full-text available
The adoption of a vegetarian diet might have public health and environmental benefits. However, little is known about urban and rural Generation Z tourists' attitudes toward vegetarianism or vegetarian consumption within the Chinese urban and rural settings. Hence, to address this gap, the present study adopted a sequential and mixed research approach based on a survey (n = 212) and laddering interviews (n = 20) to validate post-millennial tourists' motives for adopting a vegetarian diet. The results identified the top four motives as environmental protection and resource conservation, ethical consideration, personal taste and choice, and personal healthcare issues. The top four barriers to vegetarianism were unavailability and limited choice, peer pressure, traditional prejudice/habit, and the inability to change. The results also demonstrated that both rural and urban tourists adopt vegetarianism mainly for environmental protection and ethical consideration, a subtle difference between them is that urban vegetarians emphasized ethical considerations more but rural ones emphasized food and variety. Urban consumers considered unavailability and limited choice as the topmost barriers to being vegetarian, while rural vegetarians found traditional prejudice to be restricting. Due to traditional dietary habits and peer influence, rural tourists face many more challenges when adopting a vegetarian diet. Understanding the perceived benefits and barriers to being vegetarian in different regions will not only enrich the theory of food nutrition but also expand Generation Z tourists' consumption behavior and practices.
Article
Full-text available
This study examines the structural relationships between vegan restaurant attributes, perceived benefits, consumption value, and future intention using an attribute–benefit–value–intention (ABVI) linkage, as an extension of the Stimulus-Organism-Response (S-O-R) model. Data were sourced from 330 respondents who were members of two vegan associations in Hong Kong and had experienced vegan food at vegan restaurants. The study finds connections between food quality, healthy food, restaurant quality, and space for veganism as antecedents of social, health, epistemic, and emotional benefits by contributing to environmental protection. The results of this study have academic and practical implications for understanding vegans’ psychological and behavioral mechanisms using an ABVI linkage. This study is an initial empirical attempt to understand vegan food consumption experiences through the ABVI relationship.
Article
Full-text available
Most people consume meat regularly but simultaneously claim to be animal lovers, which should lead to a state of cognitive dissonance and cause distress. Against this backdrop, it is important to understand why some people decide to stop consuming meat or completely eschew animal products, while others do not. Research has shown gender and self-regulatory mechanisms as important factors, but the underlying psychological processes require further examination. In total, 3259 vegans, vegetarians, and omnivores completed an online questionnaire about their diet, gender role self-concept, moral disengagement from meat consumption, and human supremacy beliefs. The results showed that male vegans described themselves as more feminine but no less masculine than male omnivores, while no such differences were found in women. Furthermore, omnivores reported the highest moral disengagement from meat consumption, followed by vegetarians and vegans. The same was true of human supremacy beliefs. Moreover, the results showed that not only is diet itself related to differences in human supremacy beliefs but also the motives for this diet, with health and environmental motives being associated with stronger human supremacy beliefs than animal-related motives. These findings present practical implications for animal rights activists, marketing, and the health and education sectors.
Article
The purpose of this paper is to provide an understanding of vegan-friendly restaurant customers’ experiences by investigating the “delighters” and “frustrators” characteristics. A qualitative approach is used to examine the semantic networks of vegan-friendly restaurant customers’ online reviews. Results indicate that salient factors which delight vegan-friendly restaurant customers relate to the attributes of vegan food and menus, social interaction, and unique characteristics of a vegan-friendly restaurant. By contrast, factors that frustrate vegan-friendly restaurant customers associate with perceived overpriced vegan foods, poor restaurant staff attitudes/negative service encounters, and hygiene issues. The results of this study have academic and practical implications through the use of an attribute performance model to understand the experiences of vegan restaurant customers. This research is an initial empirical attempt to thoroughly understand vegan-friendly restaurant experiences using big data.
Article
Full-text available
In recent years, raising consumers’ awareness of personal health, sustainability, nature and animal welfare caused vegan market, which is a niche, to grow. The aim of this exploratory design research is to examine purchase behavior and consumption habits of Turkish vegans. Data were collected from 38 vegan consumers, who live in various cities in Turkey, by adopting online asynchronous interview method. According to the findings, participants feel pressure from society because of being vegan; they purchase vegan products mostly from food and cosmetics industries. Vegan cheese and milk are among the products that participants frequently purchase. Participants also indicate that; they couldn’t find vegan cookie/desert or yoghurt; they interest in the content, nutritional value and healthfulness of the food; they think that vegan products are expensive and they get information about these kinds of products through websites and the social media.
Article
Scholars increasingly argue that the vegan lifestyle reflects a broader pattern of how political behavior is becoming more individualized and private. Veganism is particularly viewed as an unconventional form of political participation, as it is conducted to address ethical concerns and to change market practices. However, this argumentation lacks detailed empirical data. By means of an original standardized survey of a purposive sample of 648 vegans in Switzerland, this study shows that (1) a vast majority of vegans is politically motivated and aims to induce change in society at large; (2) they are highly engaged in a broad variety of political activities; and (3) politically motivated vegans live vegan more strictly and are more politically active than vegans motivated by personal concerns. This study contributes to the understanding of political participation in current times, and the insights gained may prove useful to vegan movement groups or the food industry.
Chapter
Animal lovers normally contribute to significant harm inflicted upon nonhuman animals. This is because dogs and cats are fed animal-derived foods, which are the product of death and suffering. This chapter presents an argument suggesting that, typically, people have an obligation to feed their companions a vegan diet. The claim is then defended against three challenges—from dignity, naturalness, and freedom, respectively—that are unsuccessful. A final challenge, from health, is more problematic, and a four-pronged approach to companion veganism is defended. For dogs, people’s moral and political obligations roughly coincide: individually and collectively, people should switch their dogs to vegan diets. For cats, people’s obligations diverge: while individually they should minimize the impact of their companions’ diets, as members of society they have an obligation to come to a greater understanding of how the negative impact of cats’ diets can be fully eliminated.
Article
Although daily meat consumption is a widespread habit, many individuals at the same time put a high value on the welfare of animals. While different psychological mechanisms have been identified to resolve this cognitive tension, such as dissociating the animal from the consumed meat or denying the animal's moral status, few studies have investigated the effects of the animal's appearance on the willingness to consume its meat. The present article explored how the perception of cuteness influences hypothetical meat consumption. We hypothesized that cuter animals would reduce the willingness to consume meat, and that this relationship would be mediated by empathy felt towards the animal. Across four pre-registered studies sampling 1074 US and Norwegian participants, we obtained some support for this prediction in the US but to a lesser degree in Norway. However, in all studies an indirect mediation effect of cuteness on meat consumption going through empathy towards the animal was observed. We also explored possible moderating and additional mediating mechanisms of trait pro-social orientation, caretaking intentions and sex effects for which we found mixed evidence. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.
Chapter
One of the most striking differences between vegetarians and meat eaters would seemingly exist in their cognitive, affective, and behavioral tendencies toward meat and plant-based sources of diet. The present chapter reviews the extant research on such attitudinal differences. Much of the relatively older literature focused on explicit attitudes toward meat, relied on small samples from North America and the United Kingdom, was overly liberal in defining what constitutes a vegetarian, and generally failed to analyze differences between vegetarian subgroups. Nonetheless, it seems clear from this work that vegetarians expressed strong antimeat attitudes. Recent studies have been more sensitive in how they have operationalized vegetarianism and have examined attitudinal differences between vegetarian subgroups. The available evidence suggests that differences in attitudes toward meat may help distinguish between semi- and true vegetarians, between vegans and other vegetarians, and between health and ethical vegetarians. The final section of the review speculates on the role that values, attitudes, and beliefs play in both the decision to adopt a vegetarian diet and in diet maintenance. The author suggests that at least for ethical vegetarians, attitudes about animals are more important than attitudes toward meat in choosing to become a vegetarian. Conversely, attitudes toward meat are expected to become more salient and negative following diet conversion, in part because of cognitive dissonance pressures, moralization, and social identity processes.
Article
Full-text available
In this article, we attempt to distinguish between the properties of moderator and mediator variables at a number of levels. First, we seek to make theorists and researchers aware of the importance of not using the terms moderator and mediator interchangeably by carefully elaborating, both conceptually and strategically, the many ways in which moderators and mediators differ. We then go beyond this largely pedagogical function and delineate the conceptual and strategic implications of making use of such distinctions with regard to a wide range of phenomena, including control and stress, attitudes, and personality traits. We also provide a specific compendium of analytic procedures appropriate for making the most effective use of the moderator and mediator distinction, both separately and in terms of a broader causal system that includes both moderators and mediators. (46 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Full-text available
Describes how psychological research with animals has come under fire from antivivisectionists (D. A. Dewsbury; see record 1990-16368-001 ). The discussion focuses on the reluctance of animal rights advocates to acknowledge that using animals for any human purpose, even to satisfy human needs to nurture other species, is fraught with ethical ambiguities. Owners of both kittens and snakes place the interests of their pets ahead of the unfortunate animals that the pets must eat. The author questions whether this is really so different from researchers who place the interests of sick animals or humans ahead of those animals that are research Ss.
Article
Full-text available
As arguments become more pronounced that meat consumption harms the environment, public health, and animals, meat eaters should experience increased pressure to justify their behavior. Results of a first study showed that male undergraduates used direct strategies to justify eating meat, including endorsing pro-meat attitudes, denying animal suffering, believing that animals are lower in a hierarchy than humans and that it is human fate to eat animals, and providing religious and health justifications for eating animals. Female undergraduates used the more indirect strategies of dissociating animals from food and avoiding thinking about the treatment of animals. A second study found that the use of these male strategies was related to masculinity. In the two studies, male justification strategies were correlated with greater meat consumption, whereas endorsement of female justification strategies was correlated with less meat and more vegetarian consumption. These findings are among the first to empirically verify Adams’s (1990) theory on the sexual politics of meat linking feminism and vegetarianism. They suggest that to simply make an informational appeal about the benefits of a vegetarian diet may ignore a primary reason why men eat meat: It makes them feel like real men. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Full-text available
The present study examined intergroup judgments made between four groups of non-meat eaters: health vegetarians; ethical vegetarians; health vegans, and ethical vegans. Consistent with hypotheses based on horizontal hostility and the need to maintain ingroup distinctiveness, ethical vegetarians gave unfavorable evaluations to health vegetarians relative to vegans, especially when the mainstream omnivore group was made salient. Contrary to expectations, vegans gave relatively more favorable evaluations to ethical vegetarians than health vegetarians when mainstream salience was low. This was especially true for vegans who were motivated primarily by ethical concerns. When mainstream salience was high, vegans did not distinguish between the vegetarian subgroups. Results suggest that one's motives for abstaining from meat often play a larger role in this type of intergroup perceptions than one's dietary practices.
Article
Full-text available
To examine the relationship among gender, sex role orientation, and attitudes toward the treatment of animals, 144 male and 222 female college students were administered the Bem Sex Role Inventory, a Likert-scale questionnaire designed to assess attitudes toward animal welfare issues, and a measure of perceived comfort touching animals of a variety of species. There were significant gender differences on all of the animal-related measures with the exception of self-reported comfort touching positively perceived animals. Gender and the expressive (feminine) dimension of sex role orientation accounted for a significant proportion of the variation in attitudes toward animal welfare issues and comfort with other species. Correlations between the masculine and feminine dimensions of sex role orientation were related in opposite directions on all animal attitude measures.
Article
Full-text available
Vegetarianism has long been associated in popular imagination with pacifism and nonviolence due to the prevalence of ethical motives underlying it. If this is so ethically motivated vegetarians might be expected to be more sensitive about and opposed to acts involving violence than either vegetarians motivated by health concerns or the meat-eating population in general. This article seeks to test such an expectation, reporting findings from a study using in-depth interviews with vegetarians variously motivated by ethical as well as health and other concerns, and with meat eaters. Respondents were asked their views about capital punishment, nuclear weapons, abortion, boxing, foxhunting, shooting and angling for sport. The data are used to assess theories of vegetarianism that emphasize meat as a symbol of violence and/or of domination and oppression. The findings present a varied and fairly complex picture with opposition to foxhunting and "blood" sports being considerably greater than among other vegetarians and meat eaters, to capital punishment and nuclear weapons less clearly so and to boxing and abortion not noticeably different. In fact a strong anti-authoritarian and anti-regulatory orientation among ethically motivated vegetarians appears to override potential opposition in these cases.
Article
Full-text available
Previous research, in which self-report measures were used, showed that vegetarians have more negative beliefs about meat than nonvegetarians. An important limitation of this research is that it did not examine differences in spontaneous affective reactions (i.e., implicit attitudes) towards meat and other types of food. We therefore conducted a new study in which not only self-report measures were used, but also two tasks that have been developed to measure implicit attitudes: The Implicit Association Test (IAT) and a pictorial version of the Extrinsic Affective Simon Task (EAST). Both the IAT and EAST revealed that implicit attitudes towards vegetables (as compared to implicit attitudes towards meat) were more positive in vegetarians than in nonvegetarians. In line with previous findings, the self-report measures showed that, compared to nonvegetarians, vegetarians had more positive attitudes towards vegetables and more negative attitudes towards meat. The IAT and EAST measures both correlated in the expected manner with self-reported attitudes. A logistic regression showed that self-reported attitudes were an almost perfect predictor of group status (vegetarian or nonvegetarian), and that adding the IAT and EAST measures as predictors did not improve prediction of group status. The results suggest that vegetarians and nonvegetarians differ in their spontaneous affective reaction towards vegetables or meat, and provide further evidence for the validity of the IAT and EAST as measures of inter-individual differences in attitudes. Implicit attitudes could influence eating behaviour indirectly by biasing the decision to become a vegetarian or by determining how difficult it is for someone to maintain a vegetarian diet.
Article
Full-text available
Describes how psychological research with animals has come under fire from antivivisectionists (D. A. Dewsbury; see record 1990-16368-001). The discussion focuses on the reluctance of animal rights advocates to acknowledge that using animals for any human purpose, even to satisfy human needs to nurture other species, is fraught with ethical ambiguities. Owners of both kittens and snakes place the interests of their pets ahead of the unfortunate animals that the pets must eat. The author questions whether this is really so different from researchers who place the interests of sick animals or humans ahead of those animals that are research Ss. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Full-text available
Tested the value pluralism model, which asserts that people are likely to think about an issue domain in integratively complex ways to the degree that issue domain activates conflicting values that people perceive as (a) important and (b) approximately equally important. The relations between the value hierarchies endorsed by 145 undergraduates (measured by the Rokeach Value Survey) and the policy preferences they expressed on issues designed to activate conflicts between different pairs of basic social/political values (e.g., the question of whether one is willing to pay higher taxes to assist the poor activates a conflict between concern for personal prosperity and social equality). Regression analyses revealed that (a) policy preferences could be best predicted from knowledge of which of the conflicting values Ss deemed more important and (b) the integrative complexity of people's reasoning about policy issues could be best predicted from knowledge of the similarity of the importance rankings of the conflicting values, the mean importance ranking of the 2 conflicting values, and the interaction of these 2 terms. It is concluded that the value pluralism model provides a flexible theoretical framework for predicting Ideology Issue interactions in both the content and structure of policy reasoning. (43 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Full-text available
Studies on dehumanization demonstrated that denying certain human characteristics might serve as a strategy for moral disengagement. Meat consumption—especially in the times of cruel animal farming—is related to the exclusion of animals from the human scope of justice. In the present research, it was hypothesized that the conception of human uniqueness (denying animals certain psychological characteristics) might be a strategy of meat-eaters' moral disengagement. Three studies compared the extent to which vegetarians and omnivores attribute psychological characteristics to humans versus animals. In Study 1, vegetarian participants ascribed more secondary (uniquely human) emotions to animals than did the omnivores; however, there were no differences in primary (animalistic) emotions. Study 2 showed that omnivores distinguish human characteristics from animalistic ones more sharply than vegetarians do, while both groups do not differ in distinguishing human characteristics from mechanistic ones. Study 3 confirmed the results by showing that omnivores ascribed less secondary emotions to traditionally edible animals than to the non-edible species, while vegetarians did not differentiate these animals. These results support the claim that the lay conceptions of ‘human uniqueness’ are strategies of moral disengagement. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Article
Full-text available
Many people like eating meat, but most are reluctant to harm things that have minds. The current three studies show that this dissonance motivates people to deny minds to animals. Study 1 demonstrates that animals considered appropriate for human consumption are ascribed diminished mental capacities. Study 2 shows that meat eaters are motivated to deny minds to food animals when they are reminded of the link between meat and animal suffering. Finally, Study 3 provides direct support for our dissonance hypothesis, showing that expectations regarding the immediate consumption of meat increase mind denial. Moreover, this mind denial in turn reduces negative affect associated with dissonance. The findings highlight the role of dissonance reduction in facilitating the practice of meat eating and protecting cultural commitments.
Article
Full-text available
Empathy and affective appraisals for conspecifics are among the hallmarks of social interaction. Using functional MRI, we hypothesized that vegetarians and vegans, who made their feeding choice for ethical reasons, might show brain responses to conditions of suffering involving humans or animals different from omnivores. We recruited 20 omnivore subjects, 19 vegetarians, and 21 vegans. The groups were matched for sex and age. Brain activation was investigated using fMRI and an event-related design during observation of negative affective pictures of human beings and animals (showing mutilations, murdered people, human/animal threat, tortures, wounds, etc.). Participants saw negative-valence scenes related to humans and animals, alternating with natural landscapes. During human negative valence scenes, compared with omnivores, vegetarians and vegans had an increased recruitment of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and inferior frontal gyrus (IFG). More critically, during animal negative valence scenes, they had decreased amygdala activation and increased activation of the lingual gyri, the left cuneus, the posterior cingulate cortex and several areas mainly located in the frontal lobes, including the ACC, the IFG and the middle frontal gyrus. Nonetheless, also substantial differences between vegetarians and vegans have been found responding to negative scenes. Vegetarians showed a selective recruitment of the right inferior parietal lobule during human negative scenes, and a prevailing activation of the ACC during animal negative scenes. Conversely, during animal negative scenes an increased activation of the inferior prefrontal cortex was observed in vegans. These results suggest that empathy toward non conspecifics has different neural representation among individuals with different feeding habits, perhaps reflecting different motivational factors and beliefs.
Article
Full-text available
In this article, we attempt to distinguish between the properties of moderator and mediator variables at a number of levels. First, we seek to make theorists and researchers aware of the importance of not using the terms moderator and mediator interchangeably by carefully elaborating, both conceptually and strategically, the many ways in which moderators and mediators differ. We then go beyond this largely pedagogical function and delineate the conceptual and strategic implications of making use of such distinctions with regard to a wide range of phenomena, including control and stress, attitudes, and personality traits. We also provide a specific compendium of analytic procedures appropriate for making the most effective use of the moderator and mediator distinction, both separately and in terms of a broader causal system that includes both moderators and mediators.
Article
Full-text available
Five studies explored cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses to proscribed forms of social cognition. Experiments 1 and 2 revealed that people responded to taboo trade-offs that monetized sacred values with moral outrage and cleansing. Experiments 3 and 4 revealed that racial egalitarians were least likely to use, and angriest at those who did use, race-tainted base rates and that egalitarians who inadvertently used such base rates tried to reaffirm their fair-mindedness. Experiment 5 revealed that Christian fundamentalists were most likely to reject heretical counterfactuals that applied everyday causal schemata to Biblical narratives and to engage in moral cleansing after merely contemplating such possibilities. Although the results fit the sacred-value-protection model (SVPM) better than rival formulations, the SVPM must draw on cross-cultural taxonomies of relational schemata to specify normative boundaries on thought.
Article
Full-text available
This qualitative study explored the motivations of vegetarians by means of online ethnographic research with participants in an international message board. The researcher participated in discussions on the board, gathered responses to questions from 33 participants, and conducted follow-up e-mail interviews with 18 of these participants. Respondents were predominantly from the US, Canada and the UK. Seventy per cent were females, and ages ranged from 14 to 53, with a median of 26 years. Data were analysed using a thematic approach. While this research found that health and the ethical treatment of animals were the main motivators for participants' vegetarianism, participants reported a range of commitments to environmental concerns, although in only one case was environmentalism a primary motivator for becoming a vegetarian. The data indicate that vegetarians may follow a trajectory, in which initial motivations are augmented over time by other reasons for sustaining or further restricting their diet.
Article
This article presents the rationale and procedures for conducting a process analysis in evaluation research. Such an analysis attempts to identify the process that mediates the effects of some treatment, by estimating the parameters of a causal chain between the treatment and some outcome variable. Two different procedures for estimating mediation are discussed. In addition we present procedures for examining whether a treatment exerts its effects, in part, by altering the mediating process that produces the outcome. Finally, the benefits of process analysis in evaluation research are underlined.
Article
We describe a rather common process that we call moralization, in which objects or activities that were previously morally neutral acquire a moral component. Moralization converts preferences into values, and in doing so influences cross-generational transmission (because values are passed more effectively in families than are preferences), increases the likelihood of internalization, invokes greater emotional response, and mobilizes the support of governmental and other cultural institutions. In recent decades, we claim, cigarette smoking in America has become moralized. We support our claims about some of the consequences of moralization with an analysis of differences between health and moral vegetarians. Compared with health vegetarians, moral vegetarians find meat more disgusting, offer more reasons in support of their meat avoidance, and avoid a wider range of animal foods. However, contrary to our prediction, liking for meat is about the same in moral and health vegetarians.
Article
Past research found that positive attitudes toward animals are positively correlated with human-directed empathy. One of the most common reasons for becoming a vegetarian is to avoid cruelty toward animals. Based on the above literature, we hypothesized that vegetarians, especially moral vegetarians, would show higher human-directed empathy and more positive attitudes toward pets and other animals than non-vegetarians. Seventy-two vegetarians and 67 non-vegetarians participated in the study. Pet attitudes were measured using the modified Pet Attitude Scale (PAS-M), and human-directed empathy was measured with the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), which has four subscales. Vegetarian males had significantly higher empathy and significantly more positive attitudes toward pets compared with non-vegetarian males; however, there was no differences among females. There were no differences between moral vegetarians and non-moral vegetarians on human-directed empathy and attitude toward pets. Empathy toward humans and attitudes toward pets were positively correlated for both vegetarians and non-vegetarians. We conceptualized the dietary choice of a vegetarian as a lifestyle that can be explained by their political thinking, personality, and personal value systems.
Article
The PET DINER study was a telephone survey conducted to better understand why pet owners make certain nutritional decisions for their pets. Both dog and cat owners were included, which allowed us to differentiate the way people feed pet cats vs. pet dogs and how that might reflect owners’ attitudes about pet foods. Prospective survey respondents were selected from local telephone books using a randomized process. A total of 18,194 calls were made from the five study sites between May and August, 2004. 1074 people (6%) representing 619 dogs and 455 cats completed the survey. Detailed information about feeding practices was collected. Pet owners’ perceptions were assessed based on agreement/disagreement with statements regarding pet foods and the pet food industry. The Mann–Whitney Rank Sum test was used to detect differences between dog and cat owners and the Kruskal–Wallis one-way analysis of variance on ranks was used to evaluate differences among pet owners based on both type of pet and feeding practices (≥75% commercial vs. ≥50% home-prepared diets). More cats than dogs ate commercial pet food as ≥75% of their main diet (96% vs. 87%, respectively; p < 0.001), and more dogs than cats ate a home-prepared food as ≥50% of their main diet (6% vs. 3%, respectively; p < 0.009). For five of the statements, a difference in the attitudes of cat vs. dog owners was detected (p < 0.05). In general, this reflected more positive attitudes regarding commercial foods and less positive attitudes regarding home-prepared foods on the part of cat vs. dog owners. Analysis based on both type of pet and feeding practices identified significant differences among groups for 18/26 statements. However, when the Dunn's Method for pairwise multiple comparisons was applied, significant differences were due to feeding practices rather than type of pet for 17/18 statements. Only differences in attitudes about the statement ‘raw bones can be safely fed to pets’ remained significant for cat vs. dog owners feeding commercial foods. In conclusion, more cat owners than dog owners feed ≥75% commercial foods to their pets and this is reflected in different attitudes about the nutritional soundness of commercial pet foods.
Article
A previously undocumented hypokalaemic condition with a cyclical nature, comprising acute bouts of polymyopathy followed by spontaneous recoveries, is described in the cat. Cats being fed a high protein vegetarian diet developed recurrent episodes of polymyopathy, characterised by ventroflexion of the head and neck, stiff forelimb gait, lateral head-resting and generalised muscle weakness. Plasma potassium concentrations (meanstandard deviation) were reduced from 3.28 &0.33 mmol/l at the beginning of the experiment to 2.45 &0.24 mmol/l during bouts of myopathy. This hypokalaemia was associated with increased creatine kinase activities indicative of muscle damage, and decreased urinary potassium concentrations, and was caused by insufficient dietary potassium. Cats that received the same diet supplemented with potassium did not develop hypokalaemic polymyopathy. Spontaneous recoveries of affected cats were not associated consistently with increases in plasma potassium concentrations. Plasma taurine concentrations decreased and glutamic acid increased markedly in all cats fed the experimental diet. There was no evidence of thiamin deficiency associated with the high glutamic acid intake. Veterinarians should be aware that hypokalaemic cats, and in particular those on potassium-deficient diets, may show cyclical disease with episodes of polymyopathy recurring after periods of spontaneous clinical recovery. This condition in cats may be a useful animal model for familial hypokalaemic periodic paralysis in humans.
Article
Interest in vegetarian diets is growing due to health and animal welfare concerns. This study examined the experiences of individuals who adopted vegetarian diets as adolescents or adults. Nineteen self-identified adult vegetarians, recruited from a vegetarian group in one city using snowball sampling, participated in qualitative interviews. The majority of respondents were well-educated, middle-class adults of European-American backgrounds, although they varied in age and sex as well as type and duration of vegetarian diet. The constant comparative method was used for analysis of these qualitative data. A process model describing the adoption of vegetarian diets was developed. Two types of vegetarians, health and ethical, were identified based on respondents’ major reasons for adopting a vegetarian diet. Health vegetarians were motivated by a perceived threat of disease and the potential health benefits associated with vegetarian diets. Ethical vegetarians were motivated by moral considerations and viewed a vegetarian diet as a way to align dietary behaviors with beliefs and values about animal welfare. Adoption of a vegetarian diet was influenced by the receipt of information about the health and ethical impacts of vegetarian diets, physical aversions to animal-derived food, and life transitions. These findings can assist nutrition educators in developing strategies to work with clients adopting vegetarian diets and expand understanding of food choice behavior.
Article
This study compared vegetarian and non-vegetarian teenage English girls' attitudes towards meat. A convenience sample of 15 vegetarian (mean age 17.2 years) and 15 non-vegetarian (mean age 17.3 years) girls was recruited from a teenage health clinic. Attitudes towards meat were assessed in a single, tape-recorded, semi-structured interview. Eight themes of the cultural meaning of meat were identified; five were common to both groups: Animal (66% of vegetarians, 33% of non-vegetarians); Taste/Texture/Smell (66%, 60%); Flesh and Blood (86%, 26%); Colour (33%, 20%); Miscellaneous (60%, 46%). The theme Eating Well was unique to the non-vegetarian group (40%). The themes Life/Death and Health-related were unique to the vegetarian group (66 and 20%, respectively). The vegetarians generally abhorred killing animals for food, meat's sensory characteristics and ingesting blood. A meat-free diet was not particularly associated with health in either group. The non-vegetarians tended to characterize meat positively, both liking meat's sensory characteristics and associating meat with luxury and special occasions. We speculate on possible reasons for the current popularity of vegetarianism in teenage girls.
Article
Most people love animals and love eating meat. One way of reducing this conflict is to deny that animals suffer and have moral rights. We suggest that the act of categorizing an animal as 'food' may diminish their perceived capacity to suffer, which in turn dampens our moral concern. Participants were asked to read about an animal in a distant nation and we manipulated whether the animal was categorized as food, whether it was killed, and human responsibility for its death. The results demonstrate that categorization as food - but not killing or human responsibility - was sufficient to reduce the animal's perceived capacity to suffer, which in turn restricted moral concern. People may be able to love animals and love meat because animals categorized as food are seen as insensitive to pain and unworthy of moral consideration.
Article
People enjoy eating meat but disapprove of harming animals. One resolution to this conflict is to withdraw moral concern from animals and deny their capacity to suffer. To test this possibility, we asked participants to eat dried beef or dried nuts and then indicate their moral concern for animals and judge the moral status and mental states of a cow. Eating meat reduced the perceived obligation to show moral concern for animals in general and the perceived moral status of the cow. It also indirectly reduced the ascription of mental states necessary to experience suffering. People may escape the conflict between enjoying meat and concern for animal welfare by perceiving animals as unworthy and unfeeling.
Article
A previously undocumented hypokalaemic condition with a cyclical nature, comprising acute bouts of polymyopathy followed by spontaneous recoveries, is described in the cat. Cats being fed a high protein vegetarian diet developed recurrent episodes of polymyopathy, characterised by ventroflexion of the head and neck, stiff forelimb gait, lateral head-resting and generalised muscle weakness. Plasma potassium concentrations (mean +/- standard deviation) were reduced from 3.28 +/- 0.33 mmol/l at the beginning of the experiment to 2.45 +/- 0.24 mmol/l during bouts of myopathy. This hypokalaemia was associated with increased creatine kinase activities indicative of muscle damage, and decreased urinary potassium concentrations, and was caused by insufficient dietary potassium. Cats that received the same diet supplemented with potassium did not develop hypokalaemic polymyopathy. Spontaneous recoveries of affected cats were not associated consistently with increases in plasma potassium concentrations. Plasma taurine concentrations decreased and glutamic acid increased markedly in all cats fed the experimental diet. There was no evidence of thiamin deficiency associated with the high glutamic acid intake. Veterinarians should be aware that hypokalaemic cats, and in particular those on potassium-deficient diets, may show cyclical disease with episodes of polymyopathy recurring after periods of spontaneous clinical recovery. This condition in cats may be a useful animal model for familial hypokalaemic periodic paralysis in humans.
Article
Taurine deficiency occurs in a large number of cats fed unfortified commercial diets. Deficiency arises because cats are unable to absorb all the taurine in processed diets and/or are unable to synthesize the deficit between absorption and requirement, which makes taurine an essential amino acid for cats. Taurine-depleted cats develop retinal degeneration, cardiomyopathy, altered white-cell function, and abnormal growth and development. Taurine deficiency is best estimated from the plasma-taurine concentration, with values less than 30 mumol/l considered deficient.
Article
Two studies examined whether everyday food choice motives (FCMs) and abstract values constitute food choice ideologies (FCIs), whether these ideologies reflect the same normativism-humanism polarity as Tomkins' theory suggests to reflect ideologies in general, and whether various dietary groups endorse FCIs in different ways. In Study 1, 82 female participants filled in the Food Choice Questionnaire, a short version of Schwartz's Value Survey, and Tomkins' Polarity Scale. The results reflected four FCIs: ecological ideology (EI), health ideology (HI), pleasure ideology (PI) and convenience ideology (CI). Study 2 (N=144) replicated the results for ecological and health ideologies but not for pleasure and convenience ideologies. In both studies, EI, which was typical for vegetarians, was associated with a humanist view of the world, whereas HI was related to a normative view of the world. The results suggest that food choice has become a new site where one expresses one's philosophy of life.
Article
Many people insist that their commitments to certain values (e.g. love, honor, justice) are absolute and inviolable - in effect, sacred. They treat the mere thought of trading off sacred values against secular ones (such as money) as transparently outrageous - in effect, taboo. Economists insist, however, that in a world of scarce resources, taboo trade-offs are unavoidable. Research shows that, although people do respond with moral outrage to taboo trade-offs, they often acquiesce when secular violations of sacred values are rhetorically reframed as routine or tragic trade-offs. The results reveal the peculiar character of moral boundaries on what is thinkable, alternately punitively rigid and forgivingly flexible.
Article
To determine motivation and feeding practices of people who feed their cats vegetarian diets as well as taurine and cobalamin status of cats consuming vegetarian diets. Cross-sectional study. 34 cats that had been exclusively fed a commercial or homemade vegetarian diet and 52 cats that had been fed a conventional diet for > or = 1 year. Participants were recruited through a Web site and from attendees of a national animal welfare conference. Caregivers of cats in both groups answered a telephone questionnaire regarding feeding practices for their cats. Blood was obtained from a subset of cats that had been fed vegetarian diets. Blood and plasma taurine and serum cobalamin concentrations were measured. People who fed vegetarian diets to their cats did so largely for ethical considerations and were more likely than people who fed conventional diets to believe that there are health benefits associated with a vegetarian diet and that conventional commercial cat foods are unwholesome. Both groups were aware of the potential health problems that could arise from improperly formulated vegetarian diets. All cats evaluated had serum cobalamin concentrations within reference range, and 14 of 17 had blood taurine concentrations within reference range. Vegetarian diets are fed to cats primarily for ethical considerations. Results of this study should aid practitioners in communicating with and providing advice to such clients.
A field study on the nutrition of vegetarian dogs and cats in Europe (abstr)
  • E Kienzle
  • R Engelhard
Kienzle, E., & Engelhard, R. (2001). A field study on the nutrition of vegetarian dogs and cats in Europe (abstr). Compendium on Continuing Education for the Practicing Veterinarian, 23, 81.
Can dogs and cats go vegan? Animals Today, 8, 22 The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research. Conceptual, strategic, and statistical consideration
  • S Anderson
  • R Baron
  • D Kenny
Anderson, S. (2000). Can dogs and cats go vegan? Animals Today, 8, 22. Baron, R., & Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research. Conceptual, strategic, and statistical consideration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.
Pet ownership declines, but more households loyal to dogs. USA Today
  • E Weise
Weise, E. (2012). Pet ownership declines, but more households loyal to dogs. USA Today. (Retrieved 2012) <http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/ 2012-08-06/pet-ownership-down/56882786/1>.
Cultural differences in food choices and attitudes towards animals
  • M B Ruby
  • T K Cheng
  • S J Heine
Ruby, M. B., Cheng, T. K., & Heine, S. J. (2011). Cultural differences in food choices and attitudes towards animals. Unpublished raw data.
Of meat, morals, and masculinity. Factors underlying the consumption of non-human animals, and inferences about another's character
  • M B Ruby
Ruby, M.B. (2008). Of meat, morals, and masculinity. Factors underlying the consumption of non-human animals, and inferences about another's character (Master's thesis).
Vegetarianism, veganism, and the causes of meat abstention
  • H Rothgerber
Rothgerber, H. (2013a). Vegetarianism, veganism, and the causes of meat abstention. Unpublished manuscript.
Is owning pets against the principles of animal rights?
  • K Grindell
Grindell, K. (2010). Is owning pets against the principles of animal rights? Retrieved January 2012 from <http://veganproletariat.blogspot.com/2010/07/is-owningpets-against-principles-of.html>.
Process analysis. Estimating mediation in evaluation research
  • C Judd
  • D Kenny
Judd, C., & Kenny, D. (1981). Process analysis. Estimating mediation in evaluation research. Evaluation Research, 5, 602-619.
Taurine deficiency syndrome in cats. Veterinary Clinics of North America
  • K C Hayes
  • E A Trautwein
Hayes, K. C., & Trautwein, E. A. (1989). Taurine deficiency syndrome in cats. Veterinary Clinics of North America. Small Animal Practice, 19, 404-413.