Defensive reactions to a meat reduction intervention.

Area of Science:

• Environmental Psychology
• Behavioral Science
• Sustainable Food Systems

Background:

• Dietary shifts towards plant-based eating offer significant environmental and health benefits.
• However, interventions promoting these changes can elicit defensive reactions, with limited understanding of underlying mechanisms.
• Psychological reactance and individual traits may act as barriers to sustainable food transitions.

Purpose of the Study:

• To experimentally investigate the effects of a meat reduction intervention on willingness to change diet and psychological reactance.
• To explore the role of antisocial tendencies in moderating intervention effects and influencing attitudes towards plant-based diets and policies.

Main Methods:

• A preregistered experiment with 1070 UK meat-eaters utilized a 2x2 between-subjects design.
• Intervention components included a reflection prompt (environmental concerns) and an action plan prompt (practical suggestions).
• Antisocial tendencies were assessed to analyze their association with intervention outcomes and policy support.

Main Results:

• The action plan prompt backfired, reducing willingness to cut meat consumption and increasing psychological reactance.
• The reflection prompt also elevated reactance levels.
• Antisocial tendencies correlated with lower willingness to reduce meat, less policy support, and amplified negative intervention effects.

Conclusions:

• Interventions aimed at promoting meat reduction can inadvertently increase resistance, particularly when offering action plans.
• Antisocial traits significantly hinder willingness to adopt plant-based diets and support related policies, exacerbating intervention backfire.
• Understanding individual differences, like antisocial tendencies, is crucial for designing effective strategies for sustainable food system transitions.