Antivegan dietarian identity 2023 (1)

Introduction to Anti-Veganism

• Main Inquiry: Investigates if anti-veganism represents a distinct dietarian identity in contrast with vegans and omnivores.

• Study Aim: Evaluate the ideological profile of self-identified anti-vegans and compare their dietary identity with omnivores and vegans.

• Participants: 214 vegans, 732 omnivores, and 222 anti-vegans surveyed.

Research Findings

Unique Dietary Identity of Anti-Vegans

• Anti-veganism shows a distinct dietary identity.

• Anti-vegans' dietary patterns are more central to their identity compared to omnivores but less so than vegans.

• Similar levels of private dietary regard and personal motivations were observed in anti-vegans akin to vegans but both groups have lower public regard than omnivores.

• Anti-vegans exhibit higher moral motivation compared to omnivores but still lower than vegans.

Ideological Profile

• Anti-vegans scored high on measures of dark humour, social dominance orientation (SDO), speciesism, male-role norms, moral relativism, while showing distrust in science, particularly plant-based nutrition.

• Surprisingly, anti-vegans displayed higher trust than omnivores in the science of plant-based nutrition despite their ideological stance.

• This study contributes to understanding anti-vegan sentiment's complex nature and its ideological underpinnings.

Veganism as an Identity

Overview of Veganism

• Defined as voluntary abstention from animal-derived food products.

• Increasingly prevalent with about 3% of the global population identifying as vegan.

Motivations Behind Veganism

• Core motivations include animal ethics, health concerns, environmental awareness, and moral considerations.

• Vegans tend to have high demographic representation among educated, urban populations with left-leaning political beliefs.

Conceptual Framework

Dietarian Identity

• Concept introduced by Rosenfeld and Burrow (2018): Refers to the importance of one’s dietary choice to their self-concept.

• Different dietary groups (vegans, vegetarians, omnivores) exhibit distinct levels of mortality and personal identification with their diets.

Vegan Prejudice

• Vegans face prejudice characterized by resentment and irritation from meat-eaters due to perceived moral superiority and ideological challenges to meat consumption.

Self-identified Anti-Vegans

Online Presence and Community

• Anti-vegans have organized both online (e.g., Reddit, Facebook) and offline, expressing complex views on health, morality, and animal death.

• Their views often oppose veganism while also being critical of its ideological underpinnings, including moral absolutism.

Study Purpose and Methodology

• The objective was to explore anti-vegan identity and its ideological markers systematically.

• The Dietarian Identity Questionnaire and various ideological measures were employed.

Analysis Plan

Recruitment Strategy

• Two waves of recruitment resulted in sufficient sample sizes while ensuring heterogeneity in dietary identity representation.

• Questions focused on personal dietary history and current affiliations to vet participants.

Sample Demographics

• Diverse age range (18 to 84, M=33.79), gender distribution skewed towards males in the anti-vegan group.

• Ethnicity largely British (90.8% identify as White/Caucasian).

Results Overview

Anti-Vegan Identification

• Strong correlation between anti-vegan identity and perception of veganism as a threat.

• Anti-vegan participants reported more dark humour and higher scores on SDO, speciesism, and moral relativism, compared to omnivores and vegans.

Dietarian Identity and Ideological Variables

• Use of statistical analysis revealed main effects across dietary groups suggesting significant differences in diet centrality, motivations, and identity commitments.

• Each dietary group's public and private regard for their and other diets varied significantly.

Conclusion

• Anti-vegans demonstrate a distinct identity as opposed to omnivores, drawing similarities with vegans in identity centrality and motivations.

• The ideological divide is marked by more extreme views aligned with traditional social norms, SDO, and moral relativism, while simultaneously critiquing vegan absolutism.

• This research emphasizes the importance of understanding the complex motivations and identities surrounding dietary practices in contemporary discourse.

Participants were recruited through two waves of recruitment which resulted in sufficient sample sizes while ensuring heterogeneity in dietary identity representation. Questions focused on personal dietary history and current affiliations to vet participants.

Multi-item scales are crucial in measuring constructs related to anti-vegan sentiment as they provide a more robust and nuanced understanding of individuals' beliefs and attitudes. These scales can capture the complexity of anti-vegan identities by assessing various dimensions such as:

• Dark Humour: Understanding the inclination towards humor that may belittle vegan principles.

• Social Dominance Orientation (SDO): Evaluating the extent to which individuals believe in the superiority of dominant social groups, which can influence dietary choices and ideological views.

• Speciesism: Measuring attitudes toward the moral consideration of animals and how it relates to dietary preferences.

• Moral Relativism: Gauging the belief that moral principles are not absolute, which can underlie anti-vegan arguments.

• Trust in Science: Assessing perceptions towards scientific claims about plant-based nutrition.

By employing multi-item scales, researchers can obtain a comprehensive profile of anti-vegans' ideological beliefs, revealing patterns that single-item measures might overlook.

why was dark houmour selected a a predictor

Dark humour was selected as a potential predictor in the study of anti-veganism because it can reflect deeper ideological beliefs and attitudes towards vegan principles. Those who engage in dark humour may be more likely to trivialize or belittle the ethical considerations associated with veganism, revealing an underlying resistance to vegan ideals. This form of humour may also correlate with other measures of social attitudes, allowing researchers to explore how such humour relates to anti-vegan sentiment and dietary identities.

what was the rationale behind the scale chosen to measure dark humour

The rationale behind the scale used in measuring dark humour in the context of anti-veganism lies in its ability to capture the complexity of individuals' beliefs and attitudes. Multi-item scales are employed because they provide a more robust and nuanced understanding of dark humour's relationship with ideological views. By assessing various dimensions such as the inclination to trivialize ethical considerations associated with veganism, researchers can uncover patterns of resistance to vegan ideals. This method allows for a comprehensive profile of anti-vegans' ideological beliefs, revealing connections between dark humour and broader social attitudes that single-item measures might oveklook

where do the subscale comes from in measuring dark homour

The subscales used in measuring dark humour typically originate from established psychological frameworks and research that focus on humor and its relationship with various ideological beliefs and social attitudes. These subscales may be derived from previous studies on humor styles, moral attitudes, and their implications in social contexts. By incorporating multi-item measures, researchers can assess specific dimensions of dark humour, which might include aspects like the inclination to trivialize ethical considerations, or susceptibility to certain types of jokes that challenge or mock socially accepted morals, particularly in relation to veganism.

how many itme were used in each scale and how were they formtted - dark humour

The items were typically formatted statements or questions about one's sense of dark humour where respondents had to indicate on a 7 point likert scale 1 being … 7 being… entirely 1 disagree and 7 being completely agree. Each item aimed to capture the nuances of dark humour, allowing for a comprehensive evaluation of the individual's attitudes and preferences regarding humor that may involve taboo or controversial subjects. Measured their level of agreement

why was it measured like that - dark humour

The scale measuring dark humour was formatted using a Likert scale, typically ranging from 1 to 7, where respondents indicate their level of agreement with each statement. This format was chosen because it allows for a nuanced capture of participants' attitudes and preferences regarding humour that may involve taboo or controversial subjects. By using a multi-item scale, researchers can obtain a comprehensive evaluation of individuals' dark humour inclinations, enabling a deeper analysis of how these attitudes relate to their beliefs about veganism and broader social ideologies.

what is the rationale behinf the scale used for SDO

The rationale behind the scale chosen to measure Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) likely stems from the need to assess individuals' beliefs regarding the hierarchy of social groups and their preference for social inequality. SDO scales are typically designed to capture the extent to which individuals support the dominance of certain social groups over others. Using multi-item measures allows for a robust understanding of this construct, as it can identify various facets of beliefs related to social hierarchy, prejudice, and intergroup relations. Such comprehensive measurement is crucial for understanding how social dominance attitudes relate to dietary identities, such as those of anti-vegans.

where do the subscales come from - sdo

The subscales used for measuring Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) commonly derive from established psychological theories and empirical research focusing on social hierarchy, intergroup relations, and dominance. These subscales are constructed based on frameworks that identify attitudes toward hierarchy among social groups and the belief in the superiority of certain groups over others. Previous studies on prejudice, social attitudes, and their implications in societal contexts inform the development of these subscales, ensuring they capture the complexities associated with SDO.

why was it chosen as a potential predictor

Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) was chosen as a potential predictor in the study of anti-veganism because it reflects individuals' beliefs about the hierarchy of social groups and their preferences for social inequality. High SDO individuals may endorse attitudes that justify the dominance of certain groups over others, which can relate to dietary identities and resistance against veganism. SDO helps to understand how societal views on hierarchy and dominance might influence dietary choices and contribute to anti-vegan sentiments.

how were the scales formatted - sdo

The scale measuring Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) is typically formatted as a multi-item questionnaire, where respondents indicate their level of agreement with various statements. The items are often presented on a Likert scale, which ranges from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). This format allows researchers to obtain nuanced insights into the participants' beliefs and attitudes regarding social hierarchy and dominance among different social groups.

why was it scaled like that

The SDO scale was formatted using a Likert scale, typically ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree), because this format allows for a nuanced assessment of individuals' beliefs and attitudes regarding social hierarchy and dominance. By utilizing a multi-item approach, researchers can capture the complexities of social dominance beliefs, providing a detailed understanding of how attitudes towards social hierarchy relate to individuals' dietary identities and preferences, such as those found in anti-vegan sentiments.

what was the rational behinnd the scale used - speciasim

The rationale behind the scale chosen for measuring speciesism likely stems from the need to assess individuals' attitudes towards the moral consideration of animals and how these attitudes influence dietary choices and beliefs. Speciesism scales are designed to capture the extent to which individuals regard humans as superior to other species, which can relate to ethical beliefs regarding animal rights and treatment. Using multi-item measures allows researchers to gain a comprehensive understanding of speciesism beliefs, which is essential for exploring how these attitudes correlate with dietary identities, particularly among those opposed to veganism.

where do the sub scales come from - speciesim

The subscales used for measuring speciesism typically originate from established psychological theories and empirical research focusing on attitudes toward animals and ethical beliefs about their treatment. These subscales are constructed based on frameworks that identify various dimensions of speciesism, including beliefs about the superiority of humans over other species, moral considerations regarding animal rights, and the implications of these beliefs for dietary choices and behaviors. Previous studies on moral psychology and attitudes towards animals inform the development of these subscales, ensuring they capture the complexities associated with speciesism.

why was it chosen at a specific preditor - speciesism

Speciesism was chosen as a potential predictor in the study of anti-veganism because it reflects individuals' attitudes toward the moral consideration of animals and their beliefs regarding the superiority of humans over other species. Those with higher levels of speciesism may be more resistant to vegan ideals, as they might justify the exploitation of animals for human benefit. Understanding speciesism helps to elucidate how these attitudes correlate with dietary choices and contribute to anti-vegan sentiments.

how was the scales formatted - speciesim

The scales were formatted to include a range of statements that participants rated based on their agreement or disagreement, allowing for a nuanced assessment of their beliefs and attitudes towards speciesism. Each subscale was designed to measure specific dimensions of speciesism, such as perceived human superiority, moral obligation towards animals, and the justification of animal use in dietary practices.

The scale measuring speciesism is typically formatted as a multi-item questionnaire, where respondents indicate their level of agreement with various statements. The items are often presented on a Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). This format allows researchers to capture nuanced beliefs regarding the moral consideration of animals and their treatment.

why was it measured that way - speciseicm

The scale measuring speciesism was formatted using a Likert scale, typically ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree), to allow for nuanced assessment of individuals' beliefs and attitudes regarding the moral consideration of animals. This format enables researchers to capture the complexities of speciesist beliefs by allowing respondents to express varying degrees of agreement or disagreement with specific statements. By using a multi-item approach, researchers can obtain a comprehensive evaluation of individuals' attitudes towards speciesism and how these beliefs relate to dietary identities, particularly in the context of anti-vegan sentiments.

rationale behind scales chosen - male norms

The rationale behind the scale chosen to measure male role norms typically involves the need to assess attitudes and beliefs related to traditional masculine roles and behaviors. These scales aim to capture how individuals perceive expectations around masculinity and how these perceptions might influence behaviors and attitudes in various contexts, including dietary choices or social interactions. Utilizing multi-item measures allows researchers to evaluate various dimensions of male role norms, such as dominance, emotional restriction, and aggression, providing insights into how these norms correlate with broader social attitudes and identities.

where do the sub scales from from - male norms

The subscales used for measuring male role norms typically originate from established psychological theories and empirical research focusing on gender roles and masculinity. These subscales are constructed based on frameworks that identify attitudes and beliefs about traditional male roles, including expectations related to dominance, emotional expression, and social behaviors. Previous studies on gender norms, masculinity, and their implications in social contexts inform the development of these subscales, ensuring they capture the complexities associated with male norms.

why was it a potential predator - male norms

Male role norms were chosen as a potential predictor in the study of anti-veganism because they reflect societal expectations and beliefs surrounding traditional masculinity, which may influence individuals' attitudes towards dietary choices, including opposition to veganism. Those adhering to strict male role norms may exhibit resistance to vegan ideals, as such norms often emphasize dominance and aggression, potentially justifying meat consumption. Understanding how male norms interact with dietary identities can provide insights into anti-vegan sentiments and the ideological underpinnings of dietary practices.

how was the scales formatted - male norms

The scales used to measure male role norms are typically formatted as multi-item questionnaires, where respondents indicate their level of agreement with various statements. These items are often presented on a Likert scale, which ranges from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). This format allows researchers to capture nuanced beliefs regarding traditional masculine roles and the extent to which these beliefs may influence attitudes and behaviors in various contexts.

why were they fornatted like taht - male norms

The scales measuring male norms were formatted using a Likert scale, typically ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree), because this structure allows for a nuanced assessment of individuals' beliefs and attitudes regarding traditional masculinity. By utilizing a multi-item approach, researchers can capture the complexities of male role norms, providing detailed insights into how these attitudes might influence behaviors and perspectives in various contexts, including dietary choices and social interactions.

what is the rationale behind the scale - anti vegan sentiment

The rationale behind the scale chosen to measure anti-vegan sentiment typically involves the need to assess individuals' attitudes, beliefs, and emotional responses towards veganism. These scales are designed to capture the complexity of anti-vegan sentiments by evaluating various dimensions, such as moral objections to vegan principles, perceived threats posed by veganism to traditional dietary practices, and the impact of social norms. Using multi-item measures allows researchers to obtain a comprehensive understanding of the factors contributing to anti-vegan attitudes, facilitating deeper insights into the ideological underpinnings of dietary identities.

where have the subscales come from - anti vegan sentiment

The subscales used for measuring anti-vegan sentiment typically originate from established psychological theories and empirical research focusing on attitudes towards dietary practices, moral beliefs, and social dynamics. These subscales are constructed based on frameworks that identify various dimensions of anti-vegan sentiment, such as moral objections, perceived threats to traditional eating patterns, and societal norms regarding dietary choices. Previous studies on prejudice, social attitudes, and their implications for social behavior inform the development of these subscales, ensuring they capture the complexities associated with anti-vegan

why was it a potential predictor - anti vegan sentiment

Anti-vegan sentiment was selected as a potential predictor because it reflects individuals' attitudes, beliefs, and emotional responses towards veganism. Understanding anti-vegan sentiment is crucial for exploring how these attitudes influence dietary identities and behaviours, particularly in opposition to vegan ideals. By examining the complexities of anti-vegan attitudes, researchers can gain insights into the ideological underpinnings of dietary practices and the social dynamics that contribute to resistance against veganism.

how are the scales forammted

The scale measuring anti-vegan sentiment is typically formatted as a multi-item questionnaire, where respondents indicate their level of agreement with various statements. The items are often presented on a Likert scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). This format allows researchers to capture nuanced beliefs regarding attitudes towards veganism and to assess various dimensions of anti-vegan sentiment.

The scales measuring anti-vegan sentiment were formatted using a Likert scale, typically ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree), to allow for nuanced assessment of individuals' beliefs and attitudes regarding veganism. This format enables researchers to capture the complexities of anti-vegan beliefs by allowing respondents to express varying degrees of agreement or disagreement with specific statements. By using a multi-item approach, researchers can obtain a comprehensive evaluation of individuals' attitudes towards veganism and how these beliefs relate to dietary identities.