Red meat, reactance and political party: Defensive processing of empathy-based meat reduction appeals

Area of Science:

• Psychology
• Behavioral Science
• Nutrition Communication

Background:

• Reducing red meat consumption is a public health and environmental priority.
• Meat-reduction messages may trigger psychological reactance, counteracting intended effects.
• Understanding message framing is crucial for effective dietary behavior change interventions.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate the psychological impact of different meat-reduction appeal characteristics.
• To examine the mediating role of reactance and empathy in response to meat-reduction messages.
• To explore potential political differences in message processing and persuasion.

Main Methods:

• Three studies with 2978 participants tested message framing effects.
• Participants viewed meat-reduction appeals with varied imagery (animal association, meat-only, no image).
• Statistical analyses assessed mediation by empathy and reactance, and moderation by political affiliation.

Main Results:

• Reactance was found to mediate the link between empathy and meat-related attitudes/intentions.
• Empathy and reactance together influenced persuasion, suggesting opposing effects.
• Democrats showed stronger indirect effects of message framing on attitudes via empathy and reactance compared to Republicans.

Conclusions:

• Meat-reduction appeals can elicit both empathy and reactance, complicating persuasion.
• Message design should consider the potential for reactance and its interplay with empathy.
• Tailoring messages based on audience characteristics, like political affiliation, may enhance effectiveness.