As a part of the battle against climate change, many plant-based meat alternative products have been launched in recent years—without notable success. One explanation could be that consumers of meat alternatives are seen as socially deviant from those consuming animal-based protein products. This study adopts the BIAS Map framework, which has been underutilized in the food consumption research, in order to reveal the stereotypical beliefs, emotional responses, and behavioral tendencies that consumers of meat alternatives evoke in observers. An online experiment is conducted, participants (N = 3600) from four European countries evaluate fictitious consumers using three shopping lists that include meat products and their alternatives in varying combinations. The results reveal a conflicting picture of those who are believed to favor meat alternatives. They are seen as environmentally friendly, health-conscious people who adhere to high moral standards, and are worthy of admiration. But on the contrary, they also elicit fear, contempt, and anger in observers, who as a result socially exclude and even show aggression toward them. Second, the findings produce a novel insight regarding moderation effects related to observers' need for affiliation and status. Those high in need of affiliation demonstrate the strongest positive change in their relation to consumers who appear to favor both traditional meat products and their more modern alternatives. Additionally, those high in need of status tend to evaluate consumers favoring the modern alternatives as evoking more anger and envy, compared with consumers favoring traditional meat products. This study has several theoretical, managerial, and societal implications.
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号