Meat Attachment and Willingness to Adopt Plant-Based Diets: An Integrative Literature Review

Plant-based eating has received increasing attention because of its possible contributions to human health, environmental sustainability, and animal welfare. Yet changing what people eat is rarely a matter of information alone. For many consumers, meat is tied to pleasure, routine, family life, cultural identity, social status, and beliefs about health and strength. This review examines the psychological, cultural, social, and structural factors that shape attachment to meat and willingness to reduce meat consumption or move toward more plant-based eating patterns. An integrative literature review was undertaken using PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and ScienceDirect. The search covered January 2005 to June 2024, while earlier seminal theoretical works were retained where they remained important to the subject. The review included literature dealing with meat attachment, meat reduction, plant-based dietary adoption, and related determinants of dietary behaviour among adults. Sixty-eight peer-reviewed studies were reported as meeting the stated criteria. Across the literature, three broad areas stood out: psychological and emotional attachment to meat; cultural and social identity; and the barriers and facilitators associated with dietary change. Taste, habit, identity, social expectations, perceived nutritional dependence, affordability, and availability repeatedly appeared as barriers. Health concerns, environmental awareness, cooking confidence, supportive social networks, and gradual approaches to reducing meat were among the more common facilitators. Overall, the evidence suggests that meat attachment is an important correlate of willingness to change, but awareness by itself does not consistently lead to lasting dietary change. Interventions are therefore more likely to succeed when they are practical, culturally appropriate, positive in tone, and supported at several levels of the food system. The limited representation of African studies, particularly Nigerian research, remains an important gap that future longitudinal work should address.

Meat attachment; plant-based diets; dietary transition; food behaviour; social identity; sustainability.

1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Bastian, B., & Loughnan, S. (2017). Resolving the meat-paradox: A motivational account of morally troublesome behavior and its maintenance. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21(3), 278–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316647562 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bryant, C. J., Szejda, K., Deshpande, V., Parekh, N., & Tse, B. (2019). A survey of consumer perceptions of plant-based and clean meat in the USA, India, and China. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 3, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2019.00011 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Dowsett, E., Semmler, C., Bray, H., Ankeny, R. A., & Chur-Hansen, A. (2018). Neutralising the meat paradox: Cognitive dissonance, gender, and eating animals. Appetite, 123, 280–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.12.017 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Graça, J., Calheiros, M. M., & Oliveira, A. (2015). Attached to meat? (Un)Willingness and intentions to adopt a more plant-based diet. Appetite, 95, 113–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.06.024 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Graça, J., Truninger, M., Junqueira, L., & Schmidt, L. (2019). Consumption orientations may support (or hinder) transitions to more plant-based diets. Appetite, 140, 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.04.027 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Hartmann, C., & Siegrist, M. (2020). Our daily meat: Justification, moral evaluation and willingness to substitute. Food Quality and Preference, 80, 103799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.103799 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Hoek, A. C., Pearson, D., James, S. W., Lawrence, M. A., & Friel, S. (2017). Healthy and environmentally sustainable food choices: Consumer perceptions and barriers in Australia. Public Health Nutrition, 20(5), 908–917. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980016002923 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Janssen, M., Busch, C., Rödiger, M., & Hamm, U. (2016). Motives of consumers following a vegan diet and their attitudes towards animal agriculture. Appetite, 105, 643–651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.06.039 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Lea, E., & Worsley, T. (2003). Benefits and barriers to the consumption of a vegetarian diet in Australia. Public Health Nutrition, 6(5), 505–511. https://doi.org/10.1079/PHN2002452 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Leroy, F., & Praet, I. (2017). Animal killing and postdomestic meat production. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 30(1), 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-017-9654-8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Loughnan, S., Bastian, B., & Haslam, N. (2014). The psychology of eating animals. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(2), 104–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414525781 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & the PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Morris, C., Goodman, M. K., & Hawtin, G. (2021). The changing nature of vegetarianism: Understanding meat reduction through social identity. Appetite, 163, 105217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105217 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Mwangi, A. M., Kimani, V. N., & Wambugu, G. (2021). Perceptions and cultural meanings of meat consumption in sub-Saharan Africa. African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and Development, 21(2), 17245–17263. https://doi.org/10.18697/ajfand.98.2021.24747 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Ong, A. S. J., Tan, M., & Lim, T. (2023). Culinary nostalgia and resistance to plant-based diets in Asia: A cross-cultural analysis. Food, Culture & Society, 26(3), 421–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/15528014.2023.2175439 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Oniang’o, R. K., & Komokoti, A. (2021). Cultural aspects of meat consumption and nutritional transition in Africa. Journal of Nutrition and Health Sciences, 8(2), 45–53. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Piazza, J., Ruby, M. B., Loughnan, S., Luong, M., Kulik, J., Watkins, H. M., & Seigerman, M. (2015). Rationalizing meat consumption: The 4Ns. Appetite, 91, 114–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.04.011 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Rosenfeld, D. L. (2018). The psychology of vegetarianism: Recent advances and future directions. Appetite, 131, 125–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2018.09.011 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Rosenfeld, D. L., & Burrow, A. L. (2017). Vegetarian on purpose: Understanding the motivations of plant-based diet adherence. Appetite, 116, 456–463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.05.039 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Rothgerber, H. (2013). Real men don’t eat (vegetable) quiche: Masculinity and the justification of meat consumption. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 14(4), 363–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030379 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Rozin, P., Hormes, J. M., Faith, M. S., & Wansink, B. (2012). Is meat male? A quantitative multi-method framework to establish metaphoric relationships. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(3), 629–643. https://doi.org/10.1086/664970 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Ruby, M. B., & Heine, S. J. (2012). Meat, morals, and masculinity. Appetite, 62, 189–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2012.01.018 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Sparkman, G., & Walton, G. M. (2017). Dynamic norms promote sustainable behavior, even if it is counternormative. Psychological Science, 28(11), 1663–1674. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617719950 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Stoll-Kleemann, S., & Schmidt, U. J. (2017). Reducing meat consumption in developed and transition countries to counter climate change and biodiversity loss: A review of influence factors. Regional Environmental Change, 17(5), 1261–1277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-016-1057-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Nelson-Hall. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Thomas, E., Clark, M., & Elsey, B. (2021). Masculinity and plant-based eating: Reframing veganism in the context of performance and identity. Appetite, 164, 105281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105281 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Tobler, C., Visschers, V. H. M., & Siegrist, M. (2011). Eating green: Consumers’ willingness to adopt ecological food consumption behaviors. Appetite, 57(3), 674–682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2011.08.010 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Verain, M. C. D., Dagevos, H., & Antonides, G. (2020). Sustainable food consumption: Product choice or curtailment? Appetite, 155, 104838. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2020.104838 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Willett, W., Rockström, J., Loken, B., Springmann, M., Lang, T., Vermeulen, S., et al. (2019). Food in the Anthropocene: The EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. The Lancet, 393(10170), 447–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31788-4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Return of Fantasy in Chinese Children's Literature After 1978: A Literary Analysis
• Varying Approaches to Dropout Control in Engineering Colleges: A Narrative Literature Review.
• Writing Skills in the Digital Age: Challenges and Opportunities-A Review of Applied Linguistics, Educational Technology, and Composition Studies Literature