Document Type

Thesis or dissertation

Date of this Version

2017

Abstract

Conflicted omnivores are people who eat meat but feel bad about it. This study addresses the spending habits of omnivores in the context of their food decisions. There are three measures which each test specific hypotheses relating to these habits. Measure one demonstrated that greater salience of animal origins of meat led to lower sales of meat in shopping settings, particularly in conflicted omnivores. Measure two found that the expected cost of reducing meat consumption is not a significant predictor of the likelihood of doing so. Measure three found that, while participants enjoyed beef more and attributed more mental status to beef/cows, they strongly felt that chicken is the more responsible food choice.

Keywords

conflicted omnivore, animal salience, food shopping

Included in

Business Commons

Share

COinS
 

Date Posted: 14 September 2017

 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.