Dataset Information

Reducing meat consumption by appealing to animal welfare: protocol for a meta-analysis and theoretical review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Reducing meat consumption may improve human health, curb environmental damage and greenhouse gas emissions, and limit the large-scale suffering of animals raised in factory farms. Previous work has begun to develop interventions to reduce individual meat consumption, often by appealing directly to individual health motivations. However, research on nutritional behavior change suggests that interventions additionally linking behavior to ethical values, identity formation, and existing social movements may be particularly effective and longer-lasting. Regarding meat consumption, preliminary evidence and psychological theory suggest that appeals related to animal welfare may have considerable potential to effectively leverage these elements of human psychology. We aim to conduct a systematic review and quantitative meta-analysis evaluating the effectiveness of animal welfare-related appeals on actual or intended meat consumption or purchasing. Our investigation will critically synthesize the current state of knowledge regarding psychological mechanisms of intervening on individual meat consumption and empirically identify the psychological characteristics underlying the most effective animal welfare-based interventions.

Methods

We will systematically search eight academic databases and extensively search unpublished grey literature. We will include studies that assess interventions intended to reduce meat consumption or purchase through the mention or portrayal of animal welfare, that measure outcomes related to meat consumption or purchase, and that have a control condition. Eligible studies may recruit from any human population, be written in any language, and be published or released any time. We will meta-analyze the studies, reporting the pooled point estimate and additional metrics that describe the distribution of potentially heterogeneous effects. We will assess studies' risk of bias and conduct sensitivity analyses for publication bias. We describe possible follow-up analyses to investigate hypothesized moderators of intervention effectiveness.

Discussion

The findings of the proposed systematic review and meta-analysis, including any identified methodological limitations of the existing literature, could inform the design of successful evidence-based interventions with broad potential to improve human, animal, and environmental well-being.

Systematic review registration

The protocol was preregistered via the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/d3y56/registrations).

SUBMITTER: Mathur MB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6945605 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Reducing meat consumption by appealing to animal welfare: protocol for a meta-analysis and theoretical review.

Mathur Maya B MB Robinson Thomas N TN Reichling David B DB Gardner Christopher D CD Nadler Janice J Bain Paul A PA Peacock Jacob J

Systematic reviews 20200106 1

<h4>Background</h4>Reducing meat consumption may improve human health, curb environmental damage and greenhouse gas emissions, and limit the large-scale suffering of animals raised in factory farms. Previous work has begun to develop interventions to reduce individual meat consumption, often by appealing directly to individual health motivations. However, research on nutritional behavior change suggests that interventions additionally linking behavior to ethical values, identity formation, and e ...[more]

PMID: 31907028

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionHigh consumption of red and processed meat increases the risk of several chronic diseases. Many people, especially in high-income countries, eat more meat than recommended by nutritional and health agencies. Meat production also has negative impacts on the environment and contributes to climate change. Therefore, climate protection, besides health or animal welfare, could motivate individuals to eat less meat. Willingness to reduce meat consumption and motives to do so are not yet fully understood.Methods and analysisBased on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) extended guidelines, a scoping review of peer-reviewed original studies will be conducted to address three questions: What is the evidence regarding (1) the willingness of individuals to reduce meat consumption to mitigate climate change, (2) the awareness of individuals about the link between their meat consumption and the potential to mitigate climate change and (3) individuals having reduced meat consumption for the reason of climate protection? We will search the databases Medline (via PubMed), Scopus, Embase, Greenfile (via Ebsco) and PsynDex/CurrentContent/Agris (via Livivo) using a systematic search string. Studies from 2015 onwards, published in English, German, Danish or Dutch, will be included. We will include observational studies, qualitative studies, intervention studies (if they include surveys) and reviews. Data will be summarised in a narrative synthesis, comprising methods, population characteristics, meat type under study, indicators measured and limitations. Key findings will be grouped according to the research questions. This scoping review will help clarify the role of climate protection in individual reduction of meat consumption and identify research gaps in this field.Ethics and disseminationFormal ethical approval is not required, as primary data will not be collected in this study. Findings of this scoping review will be presented at scientific conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberhttps://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/MWB85.

Project description:We tested the plausibility of a cognitive-emotional model to understand the effects of messages framed in terms of gain, non-loss, non-gain, and loss, and related to the health consequences of red/processed meat consumption. A total of 544 Italian participants reported their attitude toward reduced red/processed meat consumption and intention to eat red/processed meat (time 1 questionnaire). One week later, participants were randomly assigned to four different message conditions: (a) gain messages focused on the positive health outcomes associated with low meat consumption; (b) non-loss messages focused on the avoided negative health outcomes associated with low meat consumption; (c) non-gain messages focused on the missed positive health outcomes associated with high meat consumption; (d) loss messages focused on the negative health outcomes associated with high meat consumption (message sending). After reading the messages, participants answered a series of questions regarding their emotional and cognitive reactions to the messages, their evaluation of the messages, and again their attitude and intention toward red/processed meat consumption (time 2 questionnaire). Comparing different multivariate linear models under the Bayesian approach, we selected the model with the highest plausibility conditioned to observed data. In this model, message-induced fear influenced systematic processing, which in turn positively influenced message evaluation and attitude, leading to reduced intention to consume red/processed meat. Vice versa, message-induced anger reduced systematic processing, which in turn negatively influenced message evaluation, and led to no effect on attitude and intention. The comparison among message conditions showed that gain and non-loss messages activated integrated emotional and cognitive processing of the health recommendation, while loss and non-gain messages mainly activated emotional shortcuts toward attitude and intention. Overall, these results advance our comprehension of the effects of message framing on receivers' attitudes and intentions.

Project description:Rabbits are the third species in terms of number of animals reared for meat production in the world. However, in comparison to other species, very few studies have focused on their welfare. The aim of the present study is to implement an animal welfare-assessment protocol developed through a multidimensional approach and containing a number of animal-based measures for bucks, does, and kit rabbits. Thirty Spanish farms with conventional cages in the first year of integration in an animal welfare certification scheme were visited during 2019 and audited by the same auditor. The protocol is divided into four principles and 11 criteria. The Good Feeding principle includes eight parameters (one animal-based), Good Housing includes 15 parameters (six animal-based), Good Health includes 26 parameters (16 animal-based), and Appropriate Behavior contains nine parameters (four animal-based). In general, the main problems found were the absence of platforms, low space allowance and low height of the cage, inappropriate systems for performing emergency killing, insufficient protection of does from other adjacent does when housed individually, and absence of enrichment material. To a minor degree, but also found in an important number of farms, was a lack of temperature data records, high replacement rates of does, and lack of mortality-rate data records. However, in general, most of the farms obtained a good overall score, the maximum found being 73 out of 100 points. Nevertheless, none of the farms reached an excellent score, and four farms were scored below the 55 points required in the animal welfare certification scheme. The Good Feeding principle obtained the highest score, reaching excellent in all farms, and Appropriate Behavior the lowest one, with values ranging from 21 to 41 points out of 100. The results probably show how, for years, rabbit producers have been very focused on feeding needs and very little attention has been paid to behavioral needs.

Dataset Information

Reducing meat consumption by appealing to animal welfare: protocol for a meta-analysis and theoretical review.

Background

Methods

Discussion

Systematic review registration

Publications

Reducing meat consumption by appealing to animal welfare: protocol for a meta-analysis and theoretical review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets