无知的欲望:吃肉会导致对其危害的信息回避吗?

IF 2.8 2区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Bénédicte Droz , Berno Buechel , Mónica Capra , Xi Chen , Anis Nassar , Seong Gyu Park , Jin Xu , Shanshan Zhang , Joshua Tasoff
{"title":"无知的欲望:吃肉会导致对其危害的信息回避吗?","authors":"Bénédicte Droz ,&nbsp;Berno Buechel ,&nbsp;Mónica Capra ,&nbsp;Xi Chen ,&nbsp;Anis Nassar ,&nbsp;Seong Gyu Park ,&nbsp;Jin Xu ,&nbsp;Shanshan Zhang ,&nbsp;Joshua Tasoff","doi":"10.1016/j.euroecorev.2025.105013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Meat consumption is associated with environmental and animal-welfare harms, and many people consume more than is healthy. Past research has shown that conflicted consumers manage their beliefs in a variety of domains. Based on two independent studies, we test whether eating meat affects people’s preferences for information about the environmental, animal-welfare, and health harms of meat, as well as the alleged environmental benefits of animal agriculture. Our findings are mixed. Eating beef causes information avoidance about the environmental effects of cattle, and eating pork causes people to avoid information about the health effects of pork. Other results were not significant. We interpret these mixed results as suggesting that eating meat causes information avoidance, but the effects are nuanced as they are meat-specific and topic-specific. This project combines the independent explorations of two teams regarding the same research question. The joint conclusion reached differs from the initial independent conclusions. Consequently, this paper also serves as a case study about the sensitivity of scientific interpretation to experimental design.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48389,"journal":{"name":"European Economic Review","volume":"175 ","pages":"Article 105013"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Appetite for Ignorance: Does eating meat cause information avoidance about its harms?\",\"authors\":\"Bénédicte Droz ,&nbsp;Berno Buechel ,&nbsp;Mónica Capra ,&nbsp;Xi Chen ,&nbsp;Anis Nassar ,&nbsp;Seong Gyu Park ,&nbsp;Jin Xu ,&nbsp;Shanshan Zhang ,&nbsp;Joshua Tasoff\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.euroecorev.2025.105013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Meat consumption is associated with environmental and animal-welfare harms, and many people consume more than is healthy. Past research has shown that conflicted consumers manage their beliefs in a variety of domains. Based on two independent studies, we test whether eating meat affects people’s preferences for information about the environmental, animal-welfare, and health harms of meat, as well as the alleged environmental benefits of animal agriculture. Our findings are mixed. Eating beef causes information avoidance about the environmental effects of cattle, and eating pork causes people to avoid information about the health effects of pork. Other results were not significant. We interpret these mixed results as suggesting that eating meat causes information avoidance, but the effects are nuanced as they are meat-specific and topic-specific. This project combines the independent explorations of two teams regarding the same research question. The joint conclusion reached differs from the initial independent conclusions. Consequently, this paper also serves as a case study about the sensitivity of scientific interpretation to experimental design.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48389,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Economic Review\",\"volume\":\"175 \",\"pages\":\"Article 105013\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Economic Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014292125000637\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Economic Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014292125000637","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

肉类消费与环境和动物福利危害有关,许多人的消费超出了健康范围。过去的研究表明,矛盾的消费者会在不同的领域管理自己的信念。基于两项独立的研究,我们测试了吃肉是否会影响人们对有关肉类对环境、动物福利和健康危害的信息的偏好,以及所谓的动物农业对环境的好处。我们的发现喜忧参半。吃牛肉会导致人们回避有关牛对环境影响的信息,而吃猪肉会导致人们回避有关猪肉对健康影响的信息。其他结果不显著。我们将这些混合的结果解释为吃肉会导致信息回避,但其影响是微妙的,因为它们是特定于肉类和特定于主题的。这个项目结合了两个团队对同一个研究问题的独立探索。得出的联合结论不同于最初的独立结论。因此,本文也是一个关于科学解释对实验设计敏感性的案例研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Appetite for Ignorance: Does eating meat cause information avoidance about its harms?
Meat consumption is associated with environmental and animal-welfare harms, and many people consume more than is healthy. Past research has shown that conflicted consumers manage their beliefs in a variety of domains. Based on two independent studies, we test whether eating meat affects people’s preferences for information about the environmental, animal-welfare, and health harms of meat, as well as the alleged environmental benefits of animal agriculture. Our findings are mixed. Eating beef causes information avoidance about the environmental effects of cattle, and eating pork causes people to avoid information about the health effects of pork. Other results were not significant. We interpret these mixed results as suggesting that eating meat causes information avoidance, but the effects are nuanced as they are meat-specific and topic-specific. This project combines the independent explorations of two teams regarding the same research question. The joint conclusion reached differs from the initial independent conclusions. Consequently, this paper also serves as a case study about the sensitivity of scientific interpretation to experimental design.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
3.60%
发文量
170
期刊介绍: The European Economic Review (EER) started publishing in 1969 as the first research journal specifically aiming to contribute to the development and application of economics as a science in Europe. As a broad-based professional and international journal, the EER welcomes submissions of applied and theoretical research papers in all fields of economics. The aim of the EER is to contribute to the development of the science of economics and its applications, as well as to improve communication between academic researchers, teachers and policy makers across the European continent and beyond.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信