Danger Ahead! How Canadians Respond to Information About the Risks of Eating Meat

Abstract

Previous research has demonstrated that animal-based diets are harmful to planetary and human health, accounting for a significant portion of global greenhouse gas emissions and increasing the risk of non-communicable diseases. In contrast, vegan and vegetarian diets have much lower environmental impacts and are associated with reduced risk of many illnesses, offering compelling opportunities to mitigate global warming and lower nutrition-related deaths worldwide. However, effectively communicating the risks of meat-based diets has proven difficult, as previous research has found that when engaging with meat-related risk communication, individuals exhibit selective exposure, the tendency to prefer attitude-confirming over attitude-challenging information. Literature has suggested that this selective exposure bias may be mitigated by information utility, the degree to which material can benefit future decision-making. Therefore, this research examines the relationship between dietary preferences and selective exposure for Canadian omnivore participants using information utility as a moderator. Additionally, this research identifies the level of knowledge consumers have about the environmental impact of meat production and how this level of knowledge may influence and be influenced by the selective exposure bias. The study recruited a sample of 361 Canadian participants who completed an online baseline survey, an experiment, and a post-experiment survey. The baseline survey results revealed that the majority of participants had a poor understanding of the relationship between meat and the environment. The experiment results demonstrated that although most participants engaged in the selective exposure bias, information utility influenced engagement with meat-related risk information for a small number of participants. The post-experiment survey results found that health risk messages framed using information utility influenced dietary decisions and decreased positive attitudes toward meat consumption. Overall, the findings have implications for persons interested in strategies for communicating sustainable diets, including practitioners, not-for-profit organizations, policymakers, the media, and academics.