"How do you know someone's vegan?" They won't always tell you. An empirical test of the do-gooder's dilemma

Abstract

A growing number of people (privately) endorse the benefits associated with adopting a meat-free diet. Yet, the societal transition to a more plant-based diet is taking place rather slowly. Why do people's private meat-free preferences fail to materialize in their daily food choices? One potential explanation is that vegetarians and vegans, at this time still a minority group, are worried about eliciting stigma and thus may not feel comfortable expressing their meat-free preferences during social interactions with meat-eaters. Their self-silencing could reinforce the notion that adopting a meat-free diet is nothing more than a niche phenomenon, and in turn discourage others from eliminating meat from their diet as well, thus perpetuating the non-vegetarian norm. Adapting the classic conformity paradigm by Asch, we found that vegetarian and vegan participants were hesitant to express their meat-free preferences. Vegan and vegetarian participants avoided signing a petition that promoted veg*an food options after a majority of confederates had declined to do so. When the experimenter endorsed veg*an food options, however, participants went against the majority, and did sign the petition. Together, these findings point to a pivotal role for exemplars and institutions: by signaling that there are allies who endorse a meat-free diet, they may liberate vegetarians and vegans to publicly express their deviant, meat-free preferences, and thus speed up wider societal change.

Keywords: Conformity; Do-gooder derogation; Meat consumption; Social influence.