The effect of meat-shaming on meat eaters? emotions and intentions to adapt behavior

Eating meat can have detrimental effects on the environment, animal welfare, and a person's health. However, consumers are often reluctant to reduce their meat consumption and public information-based awareness campaigns show little effect. As an alternative, some vegan activists and pressure groups employ emotion-based campaigns using meat-shaming techniques in the hope to change people's meat consumption behavior. By publicly and often drastically criticizing consumers, they try to make them experience negative emotions and ultimately change their behavior. In three experimental studies, we explore whether a confrontational approach of putting meat-shaming messages on products is likely to affect consumer behavior. Specifically, we find that meat-shaming messages trigger shame but also other negative emotions that translate into reduced purchase intentions. The content of the message largely determines the different emotions that are evoked. The messages can activate both restore and protect motivations, either stimulating or hindering behavioral change. Interestingly, it does not seem to matter whether the meat-shaming message stems from a governmental organization, activist group, or private person and whether it is framed with a personal or informational appeal. If the source looks credible, the message influences consumer experience and behavioral intentions.

Automated summary

Eating meat has negative impacts on the environment, animal welfare, and health. Traditional information-based campaigns to reduce meat consumption have limited effectiveness. Vegan activists and pressure groups resort to emotion-based campaigns using meat-shaming techniques to change behavior. These campaigns trigger negative emotions and shame, leading to reduced purchase intentions.