Expressing Outrage At Factory Farming Makes People Feel Less Guilty About Eating Meat

By Emily Reynolds Meat consumption has decreased by 17% in the UK over the past decade, with more and more people questioning the health, environmental and moral implications of eating meat. While some will be unrepentant about their taste for meat, others may find it more morally ambiguous, with big questions about how justifiable their diets really are. A new study, published in Social Psychological and Personality Science, takes a closer look at how meat-eaters grapple with these quandaries. It finds that blaming third parties, holding them responsible for moral transgressions, can reduce the cognitive dissonance involved in eating meat. In the first study, 310 American meat-eating participants were randomly assigned to read a newspaper article depicting the animal abuse prevalent in factory farming. The article described the lack of space, lack of fresh air, deprivation of natural behaviours and slaughter that occurs in factory farming. In one condition, participants read that the factory farms were based in the US, while in the other that the farms were in China. After finishing the article, half of the participants in each group were able to express moral outrage at the factory farm owners and operators by agreeing or disagreeing with statements such as “knowing that animals are helpless against factory farming companies makes me angry on their behalf”. They then reported how guilty they felt about the treatment of these animals, and rated their own...
Source: BPS RESEARCH DIGEST - Category: Psychiatry & Psychology Authors: Tags: Eating Source Type: blogs