Development of the Passive and Active Meat-Animal Dissociation Scale (MADS)

Many individuals like eating meat but condemn causing harm to animals. Dissociating meat from its animal origins is one way to avoid the cognitive dissonance this ‘meat paradox’ elicits. While the significance of meat-animal dissociation for meat consumption is well-established, a recent literature...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Nora C. G. Benningstad, Hank Rothgerber, Jonas R. Kunst
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: PsychOpen GOLD/ Leibniz Institute for Psychology 2024-08-01
Series:Psychology of Human-Animal Intergroup Relations
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.5964/phair.12975
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850262683423604736
author Nora C. G. Benningstad
Hank Rothgerber
Jonas R. Kunst
author_facet Nora C. G. Benningstad
Hank Rothgerber
Jonas R. Kunst
author_sort Nora C. G. Benningstad
collection DOAJ
description Many individuals like eating meat but condemn causing harm to animals. Dissociating meat from its animal origins is one way to avoid the cognitive dissonance this ‘meat paradox’ elicits. While the significance of meat-animal dissociation for meat consumption is well-established, a recent literature review suggested that it consists of two distinct tendencies. First, people may differ in the degree to which they passively disassociate meat from its animal origins. Second, they may differ in the extent to which they actively dissociate to decrease dissonance. By developing and validating a scale in three pre-registered studies using samples of American and British meat-eaters, the present investigation aimed to quantitatively establish whether these two proposed tendencies constitute distinct constructs with different relations to dietary preferences, meat-related cognition, and affect. Study 1 (n = 300) provided initial support for a normally-distributed scale with two orthogonal dimensions that were systematically and differently related to a range of individual differences and dietary preferences. In Study 2 (n = 628), both dimensions were non-responsive to short-term cues that highlight the animal-meat link but predicted dietary preferences independent of them. Finally, Study 3 (n = 231) showed that the dissociation dimensions predict dietary preferences even in people working in the meat industry who have long-term exposure to cues that connect meat with its animal origins. Together, the results of the three studies supported the notion that people’s dissociation tendencies can be divided into two qualitatively distinct tendencies. Implications and avenues for future research are discussed.
format Article
id doaj-art-f3d853d40e29402f97b5b64a1c0ba9f1
institution OA Journals
issn 2750-6649
language English
publishDate 2024-08-01
publisher PsychOpen GOLD/ Leibniz Institute for Psychology
record_format Article
series Psychology of Human-Animal Intergroup Relations
spelling doaj-art-f3d853d40e29402f97b5b64a1c0ba9f12025-08-20T01:55:08ZengPsychOpen GOLD/ Leibniz Institute for PsychologyPsychology of Human-Animal Intergroup Relations2750-66492024-08-01310.5964/phair.12975phair.12975Development of the Passive and Active Meat-Animal Dissociation Scale (MADS)Nora C. G. Benningstad0https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7955-107XHank Rothgerber1https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1692-0157Jonas R. Kunst2https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5319-1256Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, NorwayDepartment of Psychology, Bellarmine University, Louisville, KY, USADepartment of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, NorwayMany individuals like eating meat but condemn causing harm to animals. Dissociating meat from its animal origins is one way to avoid the cognitive dissonance this ‘meat paradox’ elicits. While the significance of meat-animal dissociation for meat consumption is well-established, a recent literature review suggested that it consists of two distinct tendencies. First, people may differ in the degree to which they passively disassociate meat from its animal origins. Second, they may differ in the extent to which they actively dissociate to decrease dissonance. By developing and validating a scale in three pre-registered studies using samples of American and British meat-eaters, the present investigation aimed to quantitatively establish whether these two proposed tendencies constitute distinct constructs with different relations to dietary preferences, meat-related cognition, and affect. Study 1 (n = 300) provided initial support for a normally-distributed scale with two orthogonal dimensions that were systematically and differently related to a range of individual differences and dietary preferences. In Study 2 (n = 628), both dimensions were non-responsive to short-term cues that highlight the animal-meat link but predicted dietary preferences independent of them. Finally, Study 3 (n = 231) showed that the dissociation dimensions predict dietary preferences even in people working in the meat industry who have long-term exposure to cues that connect meat with its animal origins. Together, the results of the three studies supported the notion that people’s dissociation tendencies can be divided into two qualitatively distinct tendencies. Implications and avenues for future research are discussed.https://doi.org/10.5964/phair.12975animalsconsumer behaviormeat-animal dissociationmeat consumptionmeat paradox
spellingShingle Nora C. G. Benningstad
Hank Rothgerber
Jonas R. Kunst
Development of the Passive and Active Meat-Animal Dissociation Scale (MADS)
Psychology of Human-Animal Intergroup Relations
animals
consumer behavior
meat-animal dissociation
meat consumption
meat paradox
title Development of the Passive and Active Meat-Animal Dissociation Scale (MADS)
title_full Development of the Passive and Active Meat-Animal Dissociation Scale (MADS)
title_fullStr Development of the Passive and Active Meat-Animal Dissociation Scale (MADS)
title_full_unstemmed Development of the Passive and Active Meat-Animal Dissociation Scale (MADS)
title_short Development of the Passive and Active Meat-Animal Dissociation Scale (MADS)
title_sort development of the passive and active meat animal dissociation scale mads
topic animals
consumer behavior
meat-animal dissociation
meat consumption
meat paradox
url https://doi.org/10.5964/phair.12975
work_keys_str_mv AT noracgbenningstad developmentofthepassiveandactivemeatanimaldissociationscalemads
AT hankrothgerber developmentofthepassiveandactivemeatanimaldissociationscalemads
AT jonasrkunst developmentofthepassiveandactivemeatanimaldissociationscalemads