What determines omnivores' meat consumption and their willingness to reduce the amount of meat they eat?

Background: Some meat eaters are faced with a dilemma: they like to eat meat, but they are also concerned about animal welfare, the environmental impact of meat production, and health risks associated with meat consumption. Aim We investigated the interrelationship between 'meat attachment' (people's affective connection towards meat) and the '4Ns' (four defence arguments omnivores use to justify their meat consumption: eating meat is normal, necessary, nice, and natural), two constructs often used by researchers to measure omnivores justifications for meat consumption. Second, we compared the predictive power of both constructs on omnivores' (willingness to reduce) meat consumption in a regression model that also included age, gender, educational level, financial status, and participants' beliefs concerning environmental, ethical and health issues of eating meat. Methods: In total 203 Belgian omnivores (47.4% men) completed an online questionnaire in February 2020. Their ages ranged from 18 to 55 (M = 23.57, SD = 4.64). Results: Results indicate that the correlations between the different dimensions of 'meat attachment' and the 4Ns are significantly positive (p < 0.001). A comparison of the predictive power of both constructs on omnivores' (willingness to reduce) meat consumption showed that the 'meat attachment' construct performs statistically better than the 4Ns construct. In addition, omnivores' beliefs concerning the ethical implications of eating meat are also an important predictor in their meat consumption, whereas environmental and health related aspects are not. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that national health campaigns warning about the health risks of excessive meat consumption might be less effective than health campaigns focussing on the ethical issues associated with meat eating.