Individual differences in eating motives and environmental attitudes

Figures & data

Table 1. Associations between motivations to eat meat and environmental attitudes

		Natural	Normal	Necessary	Nice
Environmental	r	−.259*	−.375*	−.194*	−.130*
Knowledge	95% CI	−.313, −.202	−.429, −.324	−.249, −.136	−.184, −.068
	β	−.084	−.323*	−.044	.028
	β (pol)	−.062	−.306*	−.007	.019
Connected to Nature	r	−.118*	−.010	−.026	−.200*
	95% CI	−.181, −.054	−.065, .045	−.087, .040	−.256, −.136
	β	−.148*	.088	.163*	−.254*
	β (pol)	−.139*	.096	.189*	−.259*
Extrinsic Motivations	r	.255*	.168*	.152*	.271*
	95% CI	.200, .316	.098, .230	.095, .211	.218, .328
	β	.184*	.032	−.095	.215*
	β (pol)	.184*	.030	−.095	.215*
Intrinsic Motivations	r	−.181*	.027	−.041	−.163*
	95% CI	−.250, −.118	−.037, .080	−.097, .014	−.224, −.103
	β	−.280*	.161	.176	−.187*
	β (pol)	−.268*	.174	.213	−.194*
Social Motivations	r	.271*	.603*	.175*	.143*
	95% CI	.211, .327	.553, .648	.118, .231	.086, .199
	β	−.006	.624*	−.028	−.046
	β (pol)	−.004	.628*	−.015	−.047
Faith in Progress	r	.391*	.461*	.338*	.281*
	95% CI	.338, .446	.413, .510	.285, .390	.227, .340
	β	.134*	.336*	.110	.049
	β (pol)	.098	.301*	.026	.067
Biospherism	r	−.264*	−.221*	−.197*	−.183*
	95% CI	−.323, −.202	−.273, −.165	−.251, −.140	−.240, −.122
	β	−.169*	−.114	−.034	−.053
	β (pol)	−.140*	−.079	.062	−.071

Note. * = p < .001. Bold values indicate specifically strong association based on preponderance of evidence. Beta weights are from regression models. (pol) = indicates weights from a model with political orientation controlled.

Table 2. Associations between motivations to be veg*n and environmental attitudes

		Health	Environment	Animal Rights
Environmental	r	−.046	.125*	.048
Knowledge	95% CI	−.104, .020	.069, .183	−.008, .105
	β	−.168	.231*	−.065
	β (pol)	−.060	.148*	−.065
Connected to Nature	r	.312*	.499*	.512*
	95% CI	.252, .368	.446, .546	.456, .562
	β	.083	.223*	.336*
	β (pol)	.073	.235*	.336*
Extrinsic Motivations	r	−.215*	−.366*	−.325*
	95% CI	−.270, −.155	−.419, −.311	−.379, −.269
	β	−.064	−.250*	−.128
	β (pol)	.023	−.258*	−.130*
Intrinsic Motivations	r	.374*	.570*	.491*
	95% CI	.305, .435	.526, .612	.434, .542
	β	.126*	.389*	.178*
	β (pol)	.129*	.386*	.178*
Social Motivations	r	.097*	.105*	.046
	95% CI	.045, .149	.053, .155	−.008, .098
	β	.073	.101	−.056
	β (pol)	.037	.149*	−.056
Faith in Progress	r	.094*	−.199*	−.164*
	95% CI	.038, .149	−.253, −.142	−.216, −.109
	β	.238*	−.271*	−.048
	β (pol)	.115*	−.116	−.045
Biospherism	r	.196*	.515*	.474*
	95% CI	.134, .259	.462, .562	.415, .527
	β	−.089	.383*	.233*
	β (pol)	.002	.273*	.228*

Figure 1. Four potential dietary motivational pathways to increase environmental attitudes and sustainable behaviors

Data availability statement

This was an exploratory study in existing data that was not preregistered. Data, materials, and script can be found at https://osf.io/5r9ac/?view_only=9de49cc0e5544be7ab11cafae594f653. A previous study with different goals and nonoverlapping analyses has been published with these data (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10668-022-02482-5). None of the analyses in this paper overlap with those of the previous paper.