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

Abstract

By means of a population-based survey experiment, we analysed the effectiveness of two message characteristics - message framing and the refutation of misinformation - in persuading respondents to reduce their consumption of red meat and increase that of plant-based alternatives. We also tested whether the effects of those two message characteristics were moderated by prior beliefs about the health and climate impacts of red meat consumption. The data were collected with an online survey of the adult population living in Finland (N = 1279). We found that messages had a small but desired effect on intentions when the effect of prior beliefs was taken into account, but that that effect was strongly moderated by prior beliefs. In particular, messages changed behavioural intentions among the "meat-sceptics" (i.e., those believing relatively strongly in the negative health and climate effects of meat consumption) but not among the "meat believers" (defined symmetrically). The combination of frames and refutation of misinformation were not found to be more effective strategies than the provision of information through single-framed, one-sided messages. We found limited evidence that the way a message was formulated determined its effectiveness in changing behaviours.

Keywords: Beliefs; Climate impact; Framing; Health impact; Meat consumption; Meat substitutes; Plant-based; Survey experiment; Two-sided messages.