Journal article
Gonzalo Palomo-Vélez, Joshua M. Tybur, Mark Van Vugt
Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 58, 2018 Aug, pp. 63-71
Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 58, 2018 Aug, pp. 63-71
View PDF
Cite
Cite
APA
Click to copy
Palomo-Vélez, G., Tybur, J. M., & Van Vugt, M. (2018). Unsustainable, unhealthy, or disgusting? Comparing different persuasive messages against meat consumption. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 58, 63–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2018.08.002
Chicago/Turabian
Click to copy
Palomo-Vélez, Gonzalo, Joshua M. Tybur, and Mark Van Vugt. “Unsustainable, Unhealthy, or Disgusting? Comparing Different Persuasive Messages against Meat Consumption.” Journal of Environmental Psychology 58 (August 2018): 63–71.
MLA
Click to copy
Palomo-Vélez, Gonzalo, et al. “Unsustainable, Unhealthy, or Disgusting? Comparing Different Persuasive Messages against Meat Consumption.” Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 58, Aug. 2018, pp. 63–71, doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2018.08.002.
BibTeX Click to copy
@article{palomo-v2018a,
title = {Unsustainable, unhealthy, or disgusting? Comparing different persuasive messages against meat consumption},
year = {2018},
month = aug,
journal = {Journal of Environmental Psychology},
pages = {63-71},
volume = {58},
doi = {10.1016/j.jenvp.2018.08.002},
author = {Palomo-Vélez, Gonzalo and Tybur, Joshua M. and Van Vugt, Mark},
month_numeric = {8}
}
Excessive meat consumption is associated with a range of environmental problems. In this investigation, we examined the effectiveness of three types of persuasive messages posited to affect attitudes toward meat consumption. The first two messages contained health and environment-related appeals (e.g., the moral consequences of environmental degradation and animal welfare), which are commonly used in campaigns aimed at meat reduction. A third kind of message – one that is less frequently applied in meat-consumption campaigns – follows from research suggesting that meat aversions are acquired via the emotion disgust. Results across three studies – and a meta-analysis of these studies – suggest that disgust-oriented persuasive messages are more effective than health-oriented messages, and they are at least as effective as moral (i.e., animal welfare) messages in influencing meat attitudes. The practical implications for campaigns to reduce meat consumption are being discussed.
