YSS33306 - Advanced Consumer Studies
Lecture 1: How effective are messages and their characteristics in changing behavioural intentions to
substitute plant-based foods for red meat? The mediating role of prior beliefs - Vainio, & Hartikainen
(2018) .................................................................................................................................................. 3
Lecture 1: Establishing credibility, constructing understanding: The epistemic struggle over healthy
eating in the Finnish dietetic blogosphere - Huovila & Saikkonen (2016)............................................ 4
Lecture 2: Seved portion sizes affect later food intake through social consumption norms - Raghoebar,
Haynes, Robinson, Van Kleef & De Vet (2019) ..................................................................................... 7
Lecture 2: Relations between the residential fast-food environment and the individual risk of
cardiovascular diseases in the Netherlands: A nationwide follow-up study - Poelman et al., (2018) .. 9
Lecture 3: Does promotion orientation help explain why future-orientated people exercise and eat
healthy? - Milfont, Vilar, Araujo, & Stanley (2017) ............................................................................ 10
Lecture 3: Consideration of immediate and future consequences, perceived change in the future self,
and health behaviour - Pozolotina & Olsen (2019) ............................................................................ 11
Lecture 4: Evaluation of research methods to study domestic food preparation - Bongoni, Verkerk,
Dekker & Steenbekkers (2015) .......................................................................................................... 14
Lecture 4: Consumer behaviour towards vegetables: a study on domestic processing of broccoli and
carrots by Dutch households - Bongoni, Verkerk, Dekker & Steenbekkers (2014) ............................ 15
Lecture 5: Shame campaigns and environmental justice: corporate shaming as activist strategy -
Bloomfield (2014) .............................................................................................................................. 16
Lecture V5: When brand anthropomorphism alters perceptions of justice: The moderating role of self-
construal - Kwak, Puzakova & Rocereto (2017) ................................................................................. 17
Lecture 6: Inequalities in health: Definitions, concepts, and theories - Arcaya, Arcaya & Subramanian
(2015) ................................................................................................................................................ 19
Lecture 6: Evolutionary considerations on social status, eating behaviour, and obesity - Caldwell &
Sayer (2019) ....................................................................................................................................... 21
X Lecture 7: Environmental inequality in Europe - De Schutter, Wieland, Gözet & Giljum (2017) .... 24
Lecture 7: Housing quality as environmental inequality: the case of Wallonia, Belgium - Lejeune,
Xhignesse, Kryvobokov & Teller (2016).............................................................................................. 24
Lecture 7: Globalization and pollution: tele-connecting local primary PM2. 5 emissions to global
consumption - Meng, Lui, Guan, Lui, Huang & Tao (2016) ................................................................ 25
Lecture 8: Food skills confidence and household gatekeepers’ dietary practices - Burton, Reid,
Worsley & Mavondo (2017)............................................................................................................... 26
Lecture 8: More than preparing a meal? Concerning the meanings of home cooking - Daniels,
Glorieux, Minnen & Van Tienhoven (2012) ....................................................................................... 28
Lecture 8: Defining food literacy and its components - Vidgen & Gallegos (2014) ............................ 29
Lecture 9: Creating the responsible consumer: moralistic governance regimes and consumer
subjectivity - Giesler & Veresiu (2014) ............................................................................................... 30
1
,Lecture 9: Sustainable consumption communication: a review of an emerging field of research -
Fischer, Reinermann, Mandujano, DesRoches, Diddi & Vergragt (2021) ........................................... 32
Lecture 10: Going green to be seen: Status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation - Griskevicius,
Tybur & Van den Bergh (2010) .......................................................................................................... 33
Lecture 10: Jerkies, tacos, and burgers: subjective socioeconomic status and meat preference - Chan
& Zlatevska (2019) ............................................................................................................................. 35
Lecture 11: Health and urban living - Dye (2008) .............................................................................. 36
Lecture 11: Urban place and health equity: critical issues and practices - Corburn (2017) ............... 38
Lecture 12: Behind the kitchen door: A novel mixed method approach for exploring the food
provisioning practices of the older consumer - Kendall, Brennan, Seal, Ladha & Kuznesof (2016) ... 40
Lecture 12: Convenience food products. Drivers for consumption - Brunner, van der Horst & Siegrist
(2010) ................................................................................................................................................ 41
Lecture 12: What influences mothers’ snack choices for their children aged 2-7? - Damen, Luning,
Fogliano & Steenbekkers (2019) ........................................................................................................ 42
2
,Lecture 1: How effective are messages and their characteristics in changing behavioural
intentions to substitute plant-based foods for red meat? The mediating role of prior
beliefs - Vainio, & Hartikainen (2018)
In high-income countries, the sustainability of current diets characterised by high levels of processed
foods, refined sugar, refined fats, oils and red meat is increasingly being questioned due to strong
adverse impacts on both the environment and human health. On the environmental side, food accounts
for 15-30% of all greenhouse gas emissions, but there is evidence that this impact could be reduced
significantly through dietary changes involving a reduction in consumption of red meat and substitution
with plant-based alternatives. On the health side, recent meta-analyses have documented a probable
link between consumption of different types of red meat and negative health outcomes.
The academic and policy literature remains sceptical about the ability of dietary recommendations and
their promotion by traditional informational measures to bring behavioural change. A potential reason
for this lack of effectiveness could be the confusion in the mind of consumers about the health and
climate effects of red meat consumption. Disbelief in the climate impacts of food was found to be the
most important barrier to climate-friendly food choices among young Finnish adults together with the
perceived difficulty to change eating habits whereas belief that a behaviour mitigates climate change
was strongly related to intention to reduce meat consumption among the adults living in the US.
In order to identify ways to communicate to the public that read meat consumption is both a health and
a climate issue we need to understand the interplay between individuals’ prior understandings and new
information. Here two communication strategies are relevant: 1) Framing and it operates by activating
information that is already part of individuals’ knowledge or belief structure, and 2) Operates by means
of helping individuals to relate their prior beliefs to new information by presenting and refuting
misinformation before presenting correct information.
Prior beliefs about read meat consumption and receptiveness to new information
Beliefs = the individuals prior knowledge or factual beliefs. Individuals’ beliefs usually support their food
choices.
Individuals appear to have positive beliefs about their own current diets and negative beliefs about diets
that are different from their own. Individuals tend to avoid cognitive dissonance resulting from
difference between information, beliefs and behaviour, and, as a result, tend to use multiple cognitive
and behaviour strategies to maintain coherence between these. Confirmatory bias, a tendency to trust
in information that confirms one’s own prior beliefs and behaviours is one cognitive strategy for
maintaining coherence.
Framing
A frame in communication = refers to the words, images, phrases, and presentation styles that someone
uses for presenting information.
An individual frame = refers to an individual’s cognitive understanding of the issue.
Many individuals are more familiar with health issues and find them more personally relevant than
environmental issues, and therefore a public health focus is potentially a more effective tool for
strengthening climate mitigation support than then traditional environmental issues. Perhaps for the
same reason framing red meat consumption as a climate issue has been found to be more challenging
than framing it as a health issue.
Refutation of misinformation
3
, Messages that directly refute misinformation have been found to be another effective persuasion
strategy, which works by helping individuals to process conceptual inconsistencies and facilitating the
acceptance of correct information. Messages that explicitly undermine misinformation have been found
to be more effective than simple messages or non-refutational two-sided messages.
Hypotheses
H1: We expect to find that reading a message (of any kind) would have a positive effect on intentions.
H2: We expect to find that the effect of messages would be strongest in the group that already had
beliefs similar to the ones presented by the messages.
H3: We expect refutational messages to be more persuasive than other messages.
H4: The frame that combines health and environment was expected to be more persuasive than the
health frame or climate frame taken alone.
Results
Reading any message was positively associated with the intention to decrease/discontinue consumption
of red meat and increase/start consumption of plant-based product alternatives, which confirms H1.
Individuals with more positive priors about red meat consumption responded relatively less to the
messages than individuals more cognizant of the negative health and climate effects of red meat
consumption. This confirms H2: the effect of information on intentions to reduce red meat consumption
is moderated by beliefs. We found that the exact characteristics of the message did not have an impact
on behavioural intentions. In particular, the coefficient of the dummy variable characterizing refutation
of misinformation is insignificantly in both regressions, and we therefore did not find support for H3.
The combination of health and climate frames in a message was also not found to bolster intentions to
modify consumption in a relatively more sustainable way. H4 regarding the potential advantage of
combining frames is therefore rejected.
Conclusion
The results increase understanding of why it is so challenging to change food habits by means of
information provision, and what kinds of strategies may be effective in changing behaviours. Consumers
who are regular red meat eaters and infrequent consumers of vegetables are often those who also have
strong positive beliefs about meat eating. In this group, communication through messages is not likely
to be an effective strategy because people tend to avoid situations where they have to face a cognitive
dissonance. However, messages were effective in modifying behavioural intentions within the group of
meat-sceptics, probably by confirming beliefs that were already held. It is also possible that repeated
exposure to messages may reveal long-term changes that were not measured in this study but should
be explored in the future. It appears that ambivalent attitudes and beliefs are more likely to be
changeable than those that are not ambivalent. Thus, it is possible that exposure to messages increases
ambivalence in respondents’ beliefs, which is not directly or immediately seen in intentions.
Overall, the findings highlight the importance of understanding individuals’ prior beliefs about food and
eating in order to devise effective means of encouraging them to adopt plant-based diets.
Lecture 1: Establishing credibility, constructing understanding: The epistemic struggle
over healthy eating in the Finnish dietetic blogosphere - Huovila & Saikkonen (2016)
Healthy eating is a practical skill important for living a healthy life and object of scientific interest in
various fields. In the public domain, these different realms of understanding are related in a complex
and often contradictory manner. The central theme for the public discussion on this topic during the
4
