The structure and correlates of vegan stereotypes

IF 4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Group Processes & Intergroup Relations Pub Date : 2024-04-20 DOI:10.1177/13684302241230001
Maya Aloni, Christopher J. Hopwood, Madeline R. Lenhausen, Daniel L. Rosenfeld, Keira O. Mohan
{"title":"The structure and correlates of vegan stereotypes","authors":"Maya Aloni, Christopher J. Hopwood, Madeline R. Lenhausen, Daniel L. Rosenfeld, Keira O. Mohan","doi":"10.1177/13684302241230001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Previous research suggests that people hold both positive and negative stereotypes of vegans, but little is known about the specific content of those stereotypes. In two studies (total N = 2,027), we identified the structure of meat-eaters’ stereotypes of vegans and developed a scale to measure them. Stereotypes of vegans assorted into three positive (compassionate, healthy, and self-disciplined) and three negative (unconventional, condescending, and unhealthy) dimensions. Meat-eaters perceived vegans more positively when they understood their motivations for their diet, were familiar with vegans, and shared their concerns for the environment. In contrast, meat-eaters who perceived vegans more negatively were more conservative, had a strong meat-eating identity, and were highly motivated to eat meat. Whereas most attitudes predicted overall positive and negative evaluations of vegans, some predicted specific stereotypes of vegans. This model and scale provide a foundation for vegan stereotype research and for improving intergroup relations between meat-eaters and vegans.","PeriodicalId":48099,"journal":{"name":"Group Processes & Intergroup Relations","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Group Processes & Intergroup Relations","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302241230001","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Previous research suggests that people hold both positive and negative stereotypes of vegans, but little is known about the specific content of those stereotypes. In two studies (total N = 2,027), we identified the structure of meat-eaters’ stereotypes of vegans and developed a scale to measure them. Stereotypes of vegans assorted into three positive (compassionate, healthy, and self-disciplined) and three negative (unconventional, condescending, and unhealthy) dimensions. Meat-eaters perceived vegans more positively when they understood their motivations for their diet, were familiar with vegans, and shared their concerns for the environment. In contrast, meat-eaters who perceived vegans more negatively were more conservative, had a strong meat-eating identity, and were highly motivated to eat meat. Whereas most attitudes predicted overall positive and negative evaluations of vegans, some predicted specific stereotypes of vegans. This model and scale provide a foundation for vegan stereotype research and for improving intergroup relations between meat-eaters and vegans.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
素食者刻板印象的结构和相关因素
以往的研究表明,人们对素食者持有正面和负面的刻板印象,但对这些刻板印象的具体内容却知之甚少。在两项研究(总人数 = 2,027 人)中,我们确定了肉食者对素食者的刻板印象的结构,并开发了一个量表来测量这些刻板印象。对素食者的刻板印象分为三个积极方面(富有同情心、健康和自律)和三个消极方面(不拘小节、居高临下和不健康)。当肉食者了解素食者的饮食动机、熟悉素食者并与他们一样关注环境问题时,他们对素食者的看法更积极。相反,对素食者持负面看法的肉食者则更加保守,有强烈的肉食认同感,吃肉的动机强烈。虽然大多数态度预测了对素食者的总体正面和负面评价,但有些态度预测了对素食者的特定刻板印象。这一模型和量表为素食者刻板印象研究以及改善肉食者和素食者之间的群体间关系奠定了基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
76
期刊介绍: Group Processes & Intergroup Relations is a scientific social psychology journal dedicated to research on social psychological processes within and between groups. It provides a forum for and is aimed at researchers and students in social psychology and related disciples (e.g., organizational and management sciences, political science, sociology, language and communication, cross cultural psychology, international relations) that have a scientific interest in the social psychology of human groups. The journal has an extensive editorial team that includes many if not most of the leading scholars in social psychology of group processes and intergroup relations from around the world.
期刊最新文献
Judgments toward displays of national (dis)loyalty in members of nations other than one’s own: Universalistic and parochial perspectives Two Paths to Violence: Individual versus Group Emotions during Conflict Escalation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories “Ins and outs”: Ethnic identity, the need to belong, and responses to inclusion and exclusion in inclusive common ingroups Divergent views of party positions: How ideology and own issue position shape party perception through convergence and divergence processes Corrigendum to “Tackling loneliness together: A three-tier social identity framework for social prescribing”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1