We investigate meat-shaming as an example of a negative emotion-based communication strategy aimed at reducing consumers’ meat consumption. We empirically test the effect of shaming messages on products on the extent to which consumers experience shame and other negative emotions, and the extent to which they appear inclined to change their behavior. Specifically, we explore the effect of the presence of a message or not (Study 1); the content of the message (detrimental effect of eating meat on the environment, animal welfare, personal health) (Study 2); the framing of the message (informational, personal blaming) (Study 2); and its source (government, activist group, private person) (Study 3). Participants were asked to look carefully at one of the images and rated purchase intention and the extent to which they felt several emotions (guilt, shame, sadness, anger, disgust, anxiety, confusion, compassion) Then they indicated whether seeing the image affected their tendency (1) to change their meat consumption; (2) to restore their self-image; (3) to change nothing. They also indicated on how many days per week they generally ate meat or meat products. In Study 2 they also rated the credibility of the messages, while in Study 3 they evaluated the reliability of the organizations that were the alleged sources of the shaming messages.
The full description of the studies can be found in the paper. Here you can find files for the images we used in the three studies and we included the data files (SPSS files). The SPSS files contain the full variable descriptions and value labels.
The images of Figure 4 with organizational logos can be obtained from the authors through email h.n.j.schifferstein@tudelft.nl