Those who request vegetarian meals in social situations such as at dinner parties or at the pub are viewed more positively if they are requesting them for health reasons rather than environmental reasons.

This is one of the main conclusions of a new research paper from the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) published in Nature Scientific Reports.

With reducing meat consumption one of the most effective ways to reduce your carbon footprint, researchers set out to explore some of the social barriers faced by those who want to eat less meat.

With a sample of 1,117 UK-based meat eaters, the researchers presented hypothetical situations of people requesting vegetarian meals in four social dining contexts (a dinner party, a barbecue, a pub meal and a restaurant). . They then analyzed respondents’ perceptions and emotional reactions to meal requesters.

They found that people who request a vegetarian meal are perceived as less critical, less judgmental, less preachy, less superior, more intelligent and more inspiring when they mention health reasons for their request, rather than none.

On the other hand, they are perceived as more critical, pious, preachy and less modest when they mention environmental motivations rather than none. However, they are also seen as smarter and more moral.

In the article, the researchers outline possible reasons for this behavior: “Meat eaters feel less interested and less irritated by those who have health reasons for their diet, and guilty and ashamed when the asker cites environmental motivations .

“This suggests cognitive dissonance, or the ‘meat paradox,’ whereby some people may want to eat meat but are aware of the environmental impact of such consumption and do not want to contribute to climate change. Health reasons for not eating meat are more personal and do not imply a moral obligation for others to make similar choices.

Researchers also found that meat eaters are more interested and inspired when an individual requests a vegetarian meal option because they reduce their meat intake (rather than cutting it out completely) than when no diet is indicated . Researchers believe this is because reducing meat consumption and adopting a more flexitarian diet is seen as less extreme and more ambitious.

They also found that respondents’ level of “meat attachment” strongly predicted their responses to a request for a vegetarian meal. People who have a positive relationship with eating meat (measured by rating the extent to which they derive pleasure from it, have a liking for it, feel entitled to eat meat, and are dependent on it) tend to respond with higher levels of distress, upset, hostility and irritability towards meat consumption. a request for a vegetarian meal.

As a result, the researchers advise: “Mentioning the motive behind a request for a vegetarian meal can help or hinder depending on the motive and the company a person is in.” In choosing whether or when to explain motives, it is important to choose your battles. »

Commenting on the findings and their wider significance, paper co-author Dr Kate Laffan from the Department of Psychological and Behavioral Sciences said: “We know that social situations pose some of the greatest challenges for people looking to reduce or eliminate their meat consumption. Our results indicate that these challenges people face when requesting a vegetarian meal are amplified by the mention of environmental motivations and when they do so in the company of people who are very attached to meat consumption.

“Given that other work reveals that many people are unaware of the magnitude of the environmental impacts of meat consumption, an important next step in our research is to explore how to address these interactions in ways that raise awareness of the environmental motivations for eating less of meat without causing negative reactions among meat eaters.