Motivated Moral Outrage Among Meat-Eaters

Many meat-eaters experience cognitive dissonance when aware that their eating behaviors contradict their moral values, such as desires to protect the environment or animals from harm. One way in which people morally disengage from their behaviors-and thus avoid dissonance-is to displace responsibility onto others. Aligning with this notion, results of three studies (total N = 1,501) suggest that expressing moral outrage at third-party transgressors reduces dissonance and preserves moral identity among meat-eaters. When participants understood their in-group as responsible for factory farming's negative impact or read about factory farming's harms to animals, expressing moral outrage at third-party transgressors reduced guilt and elevated self-rated moral character. Moreover, reflecting on the morally troublesome nature of meat-eating led participants to express more moral outrage at a third-party organization responsible for animal abuse, an effect eliminated by self-affirmation. These findings substantiate moral outrage as a new mechanism to justify meat consumption.

Automated summary

Many meat-eaters experience cognitive dissonance when aware of the contradiction between their eating behaviors and moral values. Expressing moral outrage at third-party transgressors can reduce guilt, enhance self-rated moral character, and help preserve moral identity among meat-eaters.