Dealing with the meat paradox: Threat leads to moral disengagement from meat consumption. (1st June 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Buttlar, Benjamin; Walther, Eva
• Is Part Of: Appetite. Volume 137(2019)
• Page Start: 73
• Page End: 80
• Publication Date: 2019-06-01
• Subjects: Meat paradox -- Dissonance -- Ambivalence -- Inconsistency -- Moral disengagement; Food habits -- Periodicals; Appetite -- Periodicals; Appetite disorders -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 306.4613
• DOI: 10.1016/j.appet.2019.02.017
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0195-6663

Abstract

Abstract: Meat consumption is conflicted, because meat provides pleasure to many people, but it also causes animals to suffer. This so-called meat paradox elicits discomfort in meat-eaters and they try to reduce their discomfort, for example, by means of moral disengagement. In the present investigation, we tried to scrutinize this process and examine the boundary conditions that increase moral disengagement. We assumed that, due to a domain general action-oriented state, people tend to resolve the meat paradox via moral disengagement, even if inconsistency is elicited in a different, not food-related domain. Two experiments were conducted, in which we assessed people's moral disengagement efforts via ambivalence measures after we induced inconsistency using different threats in meat-unrelated domains. Supporting our assumptions, people showed reduced ambivalence towards food in affective priming (Experiment 1) and Mouse-Tracker tasks (Experiment 2) after experiencing inconsistency. In fact, plant-based dishes became more positive and meat dishes more negative after inconsistency was induced, indicating that people disguise their endorsement of meat. This provides first convergent evidence that an inconsistency induced action-oriented state may influence cognitions regarding the meat paradox.