Determinants of vegetarian food choice
Master Thesis
Msc in Marketing
Author: Milda Dragunaite
Supervisor: John Thørgensen
February, 2011
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 1 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Foreword
In this thesis I have tried to combine my personal interests with the things I have learned
within two last years. Even though vegetarianism might seem as having nothing to do with
the marketing, I have tried to look at it through consumer behaviour – decision making and
social marketing perspective.
Even though I don’t deny the necessity of meat to certain people, my personal interest in
this factor raises from me being vegetarian myself and interacting with quite a lot people
having negative point of view towards vegetarianism. That usually leads to discussion,
where I end up in the lack of scientific arguments, therefore I hope, that this thesis would
help me to fill these gaps and find out appropriate arguments to justify my choice and
encourage others to take actions if not quitting, so at least reducing the amount of meat
consumption. Moreover, the topic relates to my major, and therefore is interesting from
social marketing perspective, which basically means, that social behaviors can be
influenced for people’s sake.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 2 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Contents
1.
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 3
1.1. Problem statement and research questions ......................................................................................... 5
1.2. Methodology and structure of thesis .................................................................................................. 6
1.3. Why is the topic actual? ...................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
2. Consumer behaviour concept ....................................................................................................... 8
2.1. Environmental-conscious consumer behavior.................................................................................. 11
3.
Food choice concept ................................................................................................................ 16
3.1.
Attributes concerning food choice .............................................................................................. 16
3.2.
Attitudes and beliefs towards food choice .................................................................................. 16
3.3. Conceptual food choice model ......................................................................................................... 20
3.4.
4.
Food choice motives ................................................................................................................... 22
Concept of vegetarianism ........................................................................................................ 29
4.1. Classification of vegetarians ............................................................................................................ 30
4.2. Vegetarian food choice determinants.............................................................................................. 32
5. Concept of mean-ends chain analysis .......................................................................................... 37
5.1. Laddering technique ......................................................................................................................... 39
6. Empirical part ............................................................................................................................ 41
6.1. Research approach............................................................................................................................ 42
6.2. Research methodology ..................................................................................................................... 43
6.3. Research sample ............................................................................................................................... 44
6.4. Research instrument, design and data collection.............................................................................. 45
6.5. Discussions ........................................................................................................................... 46
6.5.1. Health ........................................................................................................................................ 47
6.5.2 Animal welfare ........................................................................................................................... 47
6.5.3. Environmental concern ............................................................................................................. 48
6.5.4. Personal factors ......................................................................................................................... 49
References: ..................................................................................................................................... 55
Appendix A .................................................................................................................................... 60
Appendix B..................................................................................................................................... 67
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 3 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Introduction
„The growing number of consumers demanding environmentally responsible products and
the need to remain competitive has prompted many marketing managers to seek
information concerning environmental responsible purchase behavior.“ (Follows, Jobber,
1999). Vegetarianism might be considered as one of these behaviours.
“Our globe’s ‘ecological credit crunch’ is actually the most urgent crisis of our time.
Drawing upon an array of cumulative environmental indicators, it asserts that ‘reckless
consumption’ of planetary resources has led to, among other things, accelerated rates of
climate change, air and water pollution, deforestation, soil degradation and species loss
(Soron, 2010)“.
Despite the fact, that vegetarianism is becoming a rising phenomena few food consumption
studies have dealt with these issues. However, this topic should not be ignored in
connection to the risk to overuse resources and the conditions animals are raised for food.
The practice of factory farming has shown that it is a danger to human health, environment
and animal welfare (Pluhar, 2010). Concern about the meat consumption is also important
from the social marketing perspective not only because it can help to promote health
campaigns, but as well to create awareness about the negative effects of meat consumption
in order to solve global problems such as world hunger, naturalness of food, and improving
individuals’ health. Therefore it is necessary to find out, how people’s beliefs and attitudes
reflect to the choice of food. Academic literature proposes several models and theories
regarding people’s attitudes and beliefs towards food choice – to be discussed later in the
work – which attempts to discuss people’s values towards organic/ecological and
vegetarian food.
Event though there are many evidences about enormous meat consumption, numerous
research studies highlight a trend toward greater consumption of vegetarian foods. There
are evidences, that in 1979, only 1.2% of Americans classified themselves as vegetarians.
By 1994, this number had more than quintupled to 7% (Dietz, Frisch, Kalof, Stern, &
Guagnano). Further, studies indicate that even among individuals who do not consider
themselves vegetarians, a growing number are becoming more vegetarian-oriented
(Krizmanic, 1992; Richter & Veverka, 1997).
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 4 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
The topic deserves attention from marketing perspective as well. If design, branding and
lifestyle marketing have become important strategies by which producers competitively
differentiate and symbolically define their products, some thinkers insist, individuals have
also increasingly availed themselves of consumer culture’s possibilities for expressive selfcreation and lifestyle experimentation (Soron, 2010)
„Scientists have shown that the practice of factory farming is an increasingly urgent danger
to human health, the environment, and nonhuman animal welfare” (Pluhar, 2010). For these
reasons, people should consider alternatives such as vegetarian/ecological food products,
humane way of rising animals and making efforts to make earth the better place to live.
Numerous of studies proved that the number of consumed meat is increasing rapidly.
According to the U. S. Department of Agriculture, 10.378 billion U. S. land animals were
slaughtered for food in 2007 (World Farm Animals 2008). This accounts for nearly 25% of
the total estimated number of non-aquatic animals killed for food in the world (United
Poultry Concerns 2008). The American appetite for flesh has grown from 234 lbs per capita
in 1980 to 273 lbs. in 2007 (Lavelle and Garber 2008). Worldwide demand for meat is
likewise increasing as developing nations become more able to afford it. However, this
number in Denmark reached 145.9 kg a year per person in 2002, where as Lithuanians
consume 49.5 kg of meat a year (Source: The guardian, 2009 September, available online http://www.guardian.co.uk) In order to check the reliability of these numbers, Danish
Statistics (DST) website have been checked. DST provides only an amount of money spent
on meat in each household a year, and since there is no available data for average price of
meat, estimate of 40kr per kg have been made, which gave a result of 239, 4 kg per
household consumed.
Despite the fact, that scientists are constantly proving the benefits in eating meat, negative
side effects should not be forgotten. People working in slaughter houses get into direct
contact with killing animals, and they become aware of how food comes to our homes. It is
a common belief, that these people get used to their job and start to do it automatically,
which has an impact on their later life, meaning that they would become more aggressive.
As Pluhar claims, „most directly and most badly affected are those who must work in such
facilities, including slaughterhouses”. (Pluhar, 2010). However, it might have a negative
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 5 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
effect on their emotions, and being cruel and violent can become a part of their life, based
on their daily and hourly actions.
Secondly, vegetarianism supporters claim, that the stress and negativity which animal
experiences when being killed, stays in their blood, and therefore people might absorb
those, when eating meat.
Thirdly, there are some diseases which might only be gained while eating contagious meat:
such as mad-cow disease, salmonella, avian influenza, etc. Moreover, some farms which
rise animals use hormones and antibiotics in order to ensure quicker growth of production,
what might result with damage on human health, which might pass on in generations.
Moreover, the effects on the environment should also be considered. First of all, it is
proven, that meat eating contributes to world hunger, since to produce two pounds of meat,
ten pounds of grain are necessary. As Pluhar claims, “apart from overwhelming pollution,
one must consider the impact of energy-intensive factory farming on greenhouse
emissions.”(Pluhar, 2010)
As it can be seen from factors mentioned above, moral aspects of factory-farming and meat
consumption should be considered. However, even though some people disapprove unhumane behavior towards animals, they enjoy eating meat too much. Ways to resolve that
conflict must be solved, therefore, it is not only crucial to search for alternatives in case to
avoid or at least to reduce dangerous consequences of factory farming, but as well as find
ways to inform people about such opportunities.
In order to ensure the positive effect of social marketing campaigns and increase people’s
awareness, it is essential to know which beliefs, values shape owns’ mind: attitudes towards
meat and attitudes towards animals. Hopefully, with time social campaigns focusing on
moral aspects of meat eating would become a commonplace the world over. Given the
possible negative effects in meat consumption and ethical perspective, understanding food
choice from consumer behaviour point of view, may help to find insights which would
strengthen the effectiveness of humane-farming or campaigns directed to reduction of meat.
1.1. Problem statement and research questions
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 6 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
The aim of the thesis is to answer the question why people decide to adopt vegetarian
eating pattern, what are people’s motivations behind the food choice, and which
attributes they attach to the vegetarian food. In order to answer this question, thesis will
primary involve discussions about motives and factors influencing food choice and dispute
their applicability in promoting vegetarian food.
The overall objective of the thesis will be reached by attempting to answer following
research questions:

How to define the environmental-conscious consumer behavior? How does it relate
to the motivations behind vegetarian food choice?

How specific theories such as self-efficacy, value-basis and behavioral science
reference frame might be use to explain individual’s decisions?

Which specific attributes which individual ascribe to the vegetarian food influence
the final purchasing decision?

How do personal values influence vegetarian food choice?

Which other factors and to what extent influences consumers preferences in food
choice?
1.2. Methodology and structure of thesis
The overall purpose of methodological approach in this thesis is to elaborate on theoretical
findings and discuss the correlation with the findings from empirical part using combined
content analysis and internet based qualitative research method, which will be analyzed
using mean-ends chain theory and laddering technique. Moreover, the negative effects of
meat consumption will be analyzed and discussed. Furthermore, moral, ethical and political
aspects of non-meat-eating will be investigated. Findings will give deeper understanding of
the existing studies – theory and models framework, and will guide researchers’ community
to adapting existing models or developing new based on disadvantages of the ones which
already exist, therefore making space for developing social marketing campaigns, which
emphasize the necessity to be environmental-conscious in every step of the life.
In respect of underlying research questions, thesis structure will consist as follow. In the
first part of the thesis, readers would be introduced to the problem statement and research
questions as well as the actuality of the topic.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 7 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
The second part would present the concept of consumer behavior in relation to decision
making which will be followed by introducing readers to environmental-conscious behavior
concept, discussions of theory of planned behavior, protection motivation and cognitive
dissonance theory in relation to vegetarianism. Later on this part would follow the
examination of most common factors influencing food choice, discussing several food
choice models such as conceptual food choice model, food choice questionnaire
Part three would consist of the methodology of the empirical study, involving: motivational
research, research approach and research methodology.
Part four would include analysis and discussions of the study, whereas part five would draw
conclusions together with limitations and recommendations for further researches.
In order to provide the better insight to the reader, thesis structure is reflected graphically in
the Fig 1. below:
Figure 1: The graphical overview of thesis
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 8 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
2. Consumer behaviour concept
In order to find out what makes people to choose particular food, it is important to
understand what consumer behaviour is. Consumer behaviour usually refers to the way
people make purchasing decisions, why they buy or don’t buy particular product. This
section would be devoted to discuss and analyze consumer choice. Even though, some of
the decision consumer makes, might seem totally random, usually it has some meaning
behind it.
One of the earliest models analyzing consumer behaviour, is Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs,
also called ‘content theory of motivation’, which is graphically reflected in Fig.1.
Figure 1: Maslow’s hierarchy of needs
As it can be seen from the picture, consumer behaviour can consist from the simple need to
satisfy their basic needs, which in this case are hunger and thirst. It goes without saying,
that the need to satisfy primary needs appeared together with the first human beings on the
earth. However, when these needs are fulfilled, they no longer act as a motivator, and it
moves to the different level, where individuals search for safety. Safety might include the
need of protection – such as clothing, or in the higher level – protection of unemployment,
loss of money, etc. When these two needs are fulfilled, individual might move to another
level, where he has social needs, one of them is sense of belonging, and as it will be
revealed later in the work, might work as a motivator to become vegetarian. Esteem needs
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 9 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
are about recognition and noticing, the job which is well done, or the respect one gets from
others – i.e. approval. Therefore, a motivator to maintain vegetarian diet might be positive
responses from other people. The highest level of hierarchy is need of self-actualisation,
which refers to how people think about themselves – their personal success, or ability to
overcome challenge. Some vegans sometimes refer to a fact, that being vegetarian followed
by a curiosity to try vegan diet, and only few came back to their old habits. However, even
though Maslow’s model seems useful to find consumer’s motivations, there are some
disadvantages. Firstly, it fits better for measuring employee’s motivations in the
organization. Secondly, individual behaviour usually reflects to several needs, it is difficult
to distinguish one. Thirdly, even the same need between individuals might reflect the
different outcomes – i.e. different consumer behaviour. Also it is quite difficult to decide
when the particular need have been satisfied and there is little empirical evidence to support
the actuality of this model.
As it have been mentioned before, Maslow’s model is too primitive, and doesn’t help to
reveal true intentions.
Thørgensen claims, that consumer behaviour have concentrated too much on purchasing
decisions, where as it should involve all phases of consumption cycle, from acquisition
through use. Thørgensen says that in order to understand consumers’ behavior, at least
three determinants must be taken into consideration.
The motivation of the actor to choose one or the other of alternative acts toward the target
object. In Thørgensen‘s framework, which have been developed to explore recycling
behavior, and which will be presented in the following section of this work, motivations
have their roots in values and beliefs about outcomes, attitudes and norms (Thørgensen,
1994) The single variable which captures the motivational factors and transforms them into
a behavioral disposition is the person’s intention to engage in the behavior (Ajzen, 1988).
In the connection to the topic, individual might be stimulated to engage in meatless diet if
the interested party believes, that eating meat is unhealthy, or if the individual has a
positive attitude towards animals and thinks, that killing animals for food is wrong.
Secondly, it is important to consider individual’s ability to carry out his/hers intentions.
Motivation leads to performance of the behavior only if the actor commands the required
abilities to perform. From vegetarian point of view, it might be how strong individual is
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 10 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
willing to engage to the behavior, how much knowledge he/or she has, and if old habits are
not stronger than the new behavior.
Thirdly, opportunities for carrying out the intentions are a second precondition for the
performance of the behavior. That might refer to the conditions individual is in, and even if
he/she has intention to engage in particular behavior, circumstances might be an obstacle –
e.g. limitations money-wise, teenager living and depending on parents, or the rejection from
reference group.
However, the behavior I want to explain in my work is how the attitudes and beliefs make
an individual to choose to eat less or no meat. Basically, this behavior might be defined at
various levels of involvement, or with various motives leading to different outcomes. A
model was proposed by Thørgensen, which is called a behavioral science of frame
reference and is illustrated in Figure 2.
Figure 2: : A behavioral science frame of reference. Source: adopted from Thørgensen,
1994.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 11 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
As it can be seen from the figure, feedback arrows illustrate that beliefs about or evaluation
of activities might change due to the actual experience. Change might happen after the first
trial to engage in the activity – if the expectations have not been fulfilled, or it can change
after some time, when knowledge has made the task easier.
Even though not all vegetarians are vegetarians because of environmental reasons, some of
them might think that their diet is a contribution to the safer environment. As mentioned
above, opportunities to maintain particular behavior plays important role. For the
individuals, wanting to reduce or eliminate meat from their eating patterns, such
opportunities might be nearby local store offering health and vegetarian food, or a member
of the family, who already adopted that kind of eating pattern. However, this model doesn’t
guarantee, that individuals beliefs and attitudes would actually result in particular behavior.
2.1. Environmental-conscious consumer behavior
Due to increasing interest towards environment, people are encouraged to take
responsibility for their actions. In this chapter, reader will find out what is environmentally
responsible consumer.
More and more researchers, marketers and other academics pay attention to green
consumerism. It looks like environmental conscious, or so called green consumer behavior
is two-way road. „Manufacturers may use new designs and technology to minimize the
impact of a product on the environment, but their efforts are pointless if consumers do not
buy the goods”. However, the fact, that consumer is environmentally aware, and chooses
environmental friendly products, makes companies to search for improvements in their
production. Once the environmental friendly product is created, company on its own starts
promotional campaigns, and encourages consumer to use that product.
A socially responsible consumer is defined as a consumer, who takes into account the
results of his or hers private consumption, or who tries to use its consumption power in
order to bring social change (Webster, 1975). Consumers, who consider environment to be
important, evaluate their purchasing decision within the context of environmental
consequences which might result from such a decision. Therefore, environmentally
conscious consumer would combine their own needs and wants, at the same time adding
the benefit to the environment in the long run. The example of such decision might be the
use of re-usable textile bags while shopping instead of plastic ones (Follows, Jobber, 1999).
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 12 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
As Lee and Holden (1999) claims, „One of the most widely used approaches to
understanding environmentally conscious consumer behavior has been to examine attitudebehavior consistency. This model suggests that environmentally conscious consumer
behavior will be best predicted by an individual's attitudes toward the environment“. Later
authors argue, that this approach has been proved to be a poor predictor of how attitudes
influences a behavior, and discusses other variables such as affect, cost-benefit, perceived
consumer effectiveness, faith in others and demographic characteristics. Lee and Holden
discuss “environmentally conscious behaviors are performed as much, or perhaps more, for
the sake of others. Environmentally conscious behavior can be considered pro-social from
the perspective that an individual's efforts are costly in terms of money and/or time and
offer little direct benefit to the individual performing the action”. They say, that “any direct
benefit from an individual's actions will be shared by the entire community both now and,
perhaps more importantly, in the future”. Lee & Holden develops Batson’s (1987) model of
pro-social behaviour. In this model, there are three paths, two of which are egoistic and one
altruistic. According authors, „The first path is activated by the perception of another's need
and an expectation of rewards for helping and/or punishments for not helping. Under Path
1, environmental consumer behavior is seen as an opportunity to gain rewards and/or to
avoid punishments. The rewards gained may be material (e.g., refunds for recycling), social
(e.g., reference-group approval), or a self-reward (e.g., satisfaction); the punishments may
be material (e.g., fines) or social (e.g., reference-group disapproval). The behavioral options
are to act or have another act in order to gain a reward, avoid a punishment, or both. With
this goal, effectiveness in terms of environmental benefit relies on rewards and
punishments that are well linked to desired behavior” (Lee&Holden, 1999). In my work,
adopting vegetarian diet might be agreed with negative public reaction (fine), or gained
understanding of being a part of those who save world; therefore it can arouse satisfaction
and act as a self-reward.
Second path is explained by authors as following “path relies solely on the perception of
another in need. In the environmental context, the perception of another's need for a better
environment leads to personal distress or sadness. This evokes an egoistic motivation to
relieve one's own distress. The pro-environmental behavioral options are for the person to
act or have another act in an environmentally conscious manner as a means of reducing
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 13 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
personal distress” (Lee & Holden, 1999). In this case, individual can realize, that an animal
have been killed to satisfy one needs, and in order to save it from that, he might start
looking for alternatives such as free-range meat, or food which substitutes meat.
„Finally, activation of the third path includes the perception of need, but is distinguished
from the two former paths by requiring the adoption of another person's perspective (i.e.,
imagining and feeling how that person is or will be affected by environmental problems).”
That might very well refer to the individuals who choose to adopt vegetarian diet in case to
save world from hunger, raising empathy for the children in poor developed countries.
Ellen et al (1991) raises a question, what factors, excluding natural concern for
environment, influences individual’s willingness to participate into environment friendly
behavior. They discuss, that one of these factors is perceived consumer effectiveness. The
original definition of perceived consumer effectiveness is following „ the extent to which
the consumer believes that the efforts of an individual acting alone can make a difference”.
That is further explained, as “if an individual believes that an environmental problem can
be solved by a specific activity (such as recycling aluminum cans), then this belief should
strongly influence the individual's willingness to engage in that specific activity but not his
or her willingness to engage in other pro-environmental actions”. Perceived consumer
effectiveness is defined as a domain-specific belief that the efforts of an individual can
make a difference in the solution to a problem. The degree to which a person feels that he
or she has little behavioral control over the performance of a behavior has been shown to
uniquely reduce behavioral intentions and behavior, even under circumstances where
attitudes and/or social norms toward the action are very favorable. As Ellen et al found,
there is “an interaction of perceived consumer efficiency and concern on perceived
knowledge. This result may reflect in some part the growing skepticism among many
consumers about "green" marketing claims. Consumers recognize that environmental
claims are often exaggerated and/or opportunistic, making it more difficult for them to
make "good" choices. Exaggerated claims, in particular, require the attention of public
and/or private concerns to reduce the use of phrases which are theoretically but not
practically true”. As authors claim, “a consumer who is interested in helping the
environment through his or her consumption choices must have viable "green" alternatives
to non-environmentally sound products”
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 14 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Duane Elgin (1981) argues that “prevailing forms of ‘identity consumption’ run counter to
the requirements of ‘ecological living’. To this extent, the pursuit of sustainability is tied up
with the decision to step off the consumption escalator and to cultivate an alternative
identity premised on a lifestyle of moderation and reference for the natural world.
2.2. Environmental values
Before the environmental values can be presented, it is good idea to introduce readers with
the concept of the values. However, there is no clear definition of values within the context
of psychology or social sciences. Even though there is no consensus describing values,
several authors have attempted to find a definition. There is an agreement, that values can
be defined as representations of important individual and collective perceptions and
judgements of what is truly important in this world and this life, in the other words, what
has value and what are core values, which work as guiding principles for human society.
Comparing to the attitudes, values are perceived as being more „central, deeply considered,
strongly held, stable, limited in number and connected with many other beliefs” (Reser,
2005).
Values can be and are seen from the social perspective as beliefs which are held
individually and culturally held beliefs, positions or evaluative views with respect to what
is important, what is ‘good’ or ‘bad’, what has value for human society, individual well
being or the world itself. Values can be separated from attitudes and beliefs and
conceptualized and understood as more substantial and durable convictions, typically
working as a system, which consists of moral and/or emotional hints, which provide
foundations for shared world views, e.g. values, respecting human rights.
As Reser et al., explains “recent overviews of the values construct within psychology
would suggest that attempts to specify and distill the nature of human values invariably
founder on the reality that “values” can be verb or noun, can include the personal and/or the
social, can encompass belief and moral systems, can be characterized as motivational
concern and adaptive prioritizing agent” (Roser et al., 2005).
Values are a core component of what has come to be known as the „value-belief-norm
theory of environmentalism”.
Since the basic concept of values has been presented within the context of value-beliefnorm theory, let’s move to the environmental values.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 15 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
As it can be found in the studies, decision to adopt vegetarian diet is closely related with
personality, i.e. which values individual perceive as the important ones. The term
„environmental values“ might be used and understood in different context. As Reser
excludes „values can refer to fundamentally different phenomena, from individual human
emotional response or judgment, to shared convictions of how things should be” (Reser, et
al, 2005). Environmental values are viewed by Reser as reference to “individual and shared
community or societal beliefs about the significance, importance, and well being of the
natural environment, and how the natural world should be viewed and treated by humans”.
As authors explain, environmental values are more fundamental, more influential,
emotional and motivational comparing to the preferences or attitudes. Environmental
values serve as moral and responsible points of how individuals and societies should
interact and treat natural environmental at local, systematic and global levels.
Environmental concern forms several correlated factors, which can be explained by Stern’s
value- basis theory. This theory offers an understanding, that attitudes towards
environmental issues are the result of general underlying values, and different value
orientations lead to different attitudes. Moreover, the connection between values and
environmental concern is formed by an awareness of the dangerous consequences to valued
objects (Stern, 1995).
There are several approaches to which factors or values and attitudes might be a starting
point to environmental concern. Stern excludes four main approaches, which will be
discussed bellow. One approach refers to the fact that personal background such as age,
education, gender has impact towards individuals concern about environment, e.g. some
studies talk about the fact that women tend to be more concerned about the environment
than men. Second line which appears in the environmental studies is individuals’ judgments
and attitudes as well as perception of risks or in some cases benefits, attached to some
objects. According Stern, “some researchers report that a measure of egalitarian values and
beliefs is positively correlated with measures of concern about technological and
environmental risks”. The third approach which have been excluded, perceive
environmental concern as developmental phenomenon, and connects within Maslow’s
hierarchy model (which have been presented in earlier part of the work), as an expression
of higher need order. Most likely, the individuals whose primary material and
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 16 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
psychological needs are met would be more likely to convey concerns beyond themselves,
including concern about natural environment. The fourth approach looks at environmental
concern as the consequence of the process which activates, appearing ‘land ethic’ or
biospheric value orientations. In this approach environmental concerns are a subset of
moral human concerns, which emerges from universal values (Stern et al, 1995).
3. Food choice concept
When the range in the food market economy is not limited anymore, every individual can
choose what and how much to eat. However, to introduce different eating pattern, change in
the choices has to be made, therefore it is important to get an insight why people choose
particular food.
3.1.Attributes concerning food choice
Bilewicz et al argue uniqueness of human being, claiming that „human character is defined
by psychological attributes, which can be attached only to a human. These attributes
include consciousness, theory of mind, empathy, personality” (Bilewicz, et al, 2010).
Author further argue, that characteristics defined as phenomenally human also include
„intelligence, reasoning (rationality), sentiments (secondary emotion), maturity, language,
refinement, civility, morality and certain personality traits” (Bilewicz et al, 2010). At the
very early stage of this theory, the assumption can be made, that attributes applied to the
product differs depending on a person and on what they believe in. “Meat purchasing
consumers typically believe meat to be enjoyable as well as healthy, but they will know
subconsciously that the benefits of meat to them are paid for by the animal involved.
Connors et al. suggest that, in any given choice scenario, a consumer’s attitude towards
some specific issue is likely to be modified, or even cancelled, because they must attend to
competing issues“. (Schroder, 2004)
3.2.Attitudes, beliefs and motivations towards food choice
As Hirscham and Holbrook note, to find affect in consumer research, it is a good idea to
take a look to the substantial body of work involving the attitude construct. Attitudes may
be shaped by hedonic responses involving simple positive or negative feeling states (Allen
et al., 1992). In other words, people’s choice towards food is not only affected by available
supplies, it is also affected by their personalities and attitudes. In the following section in
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 17 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
my work I will discuss several models and approaches to how particular attitudes lead to
the decision.
The framework proposed by Thørgensen and discussed above is supplemented by Roschild,
who claims, that the main categories of determinants deciding food choice is motivation,
abilities and opportunity. Motivations can be recognized implementing several different
theories, such as Theory of Planned Behavior, Protection Motivation Theory and Selfefficacy theory. These theories propose different, but quite similar determinants of
intentions, and therefore is worth to discuss in this section of the work.
Protection motivation theory has been originally proposed by Rogers, and is defined as „A
fear appeal communication attempts to influence or persuade through the threat of
impending danger or harm”. As he later explains, „fear appeals have been used in attempts
to change attitudes and behaviors on a wide variety of topics, including cigarette smoking,
dental hygiene, tuberculosis, and the use of fallout shelters”. (Rogers, Maddux, 1983) The
original formulation of protection motivation theory claims, that “a fear appeal
communication initiates cognitive appraisal processes concerning:
1) the noxiousness or severity of the threatened event;
2) the probability of the occurrence of the event;
3) the efficacy of a recommended coping response.
These cognitive processes mediate the persuasive effects of a fear appeal by arousing
protection motivation, an intervening variable that arouses, sustains, and directs activity to
protect the self from danger. (Rogers, 1975)
The revised version of protective motivation model offers a supplement with self-efficacy
expectancy theory, which will be discussed below. As Rogers explains, „self-efficacy
theory maintains that all processes of psychological change operate through the alteration
of the individual’s expectancies of personal mastery or efficacy. The theory also maintains
that an expectancy concerning mastery or effective coping can be viewed as two
independent expectancies: an outcome expectancy, the belief that a given behavior will or
will not lead to a given outcome; and a self-efficacy expectancy, the person’s belief that he
or she is or is not capable of performing the requisite behavior (Maddux, Rogers, 1983).
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 18 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
As Bandura explains, „the issue of the locus at which behavioral determinants operate
applies to reinforcement influences as well as to antecedent environmental stimuli.
Contrary to the common view that behavior is controlled by its immediate consequences,
behavior is related to its outcomes at the level of aggregate consequences rather than
momentary effects. People process and synthesize feedback information from sequences of
events over intervals about the situational circumstances and the patterns and rates of
actions that are necessary to produce given outcomes. Since consequences affect behavior
through the influence of thought, beliefs about schedules of reinforcement can exert greater
influence on behavior than the reinforcement itself. Incidence of behavior that has been
positively reinforced does not increase if individuals believe, based on other information,
that the same actions will not be rewarded on future occasions; and the same consequences
can increase, reduce, or have no effect on incidence of behavior depending on whether
individuals are led to believe that the consequences signify correct responses, incorrect
responses, or occur non-contingently (Bandura, 1978).
Later Bandura discusses, that „a second cognitively based source of motivation operates
through the intervening influences of goal setting and self-evaluative reactions. Selfmotivation involves standards against which to evaluate performance. By making selfrewarding reactions conditional on attaining a certain level of behavior, individuals create
self-inducements to persist in their efforts until their performances match self-prescribed
standards. Perceived negative discrepancies between performance and standards create
dissatisfactions that motivate corrective changes in behavior. Both the anticipated
satisfactions of desired accomplishments and the negative appraisals of insufficient
performance thus provide incentives for action. Having accomplished a given level of
performance, individuals often are no longer satisfied with it and make further self-reward
contingent on higher attainments (Bandura, 1978).
Bandura later argues that expectations of personal efficacy are based on four major sources
of information: performance accomplishments, vicarious experience, verbal persuasion, and
physiological states. All these four components can be and are graphically reflected in Fig
3.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 19 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Figure 3: Major sources of efficacy information and the principal sources through which
different modes of treatment operate
As Bandura explains, once established, enhanced self-efficacy tends to generalize to other
situations in which performance was self-debilitated by preoccupation with personal
inadequacies. As a result, improvements in behavioral functioning transfer not only to
similar situations but to activities that are substantially different from those on which the
treatment was focused. Thus, for example, increased self-efficacy gained through rapid
mastery of a specific animal phobia can increase coping efforts in social situations as well
as reduce fears of other animals. However, the generalization effects occur most predictably
to the activities that are similar to those in which self-efficacy was restored by treatment
(Bandura, 1978).
Vicarious experience in Bandura’s work is defined as generation of expectations, which
arises from observing performance of others, what in turn results in belief that they will too
improve with intensive and persistent efforts. Later he explains, that „modeled behavior
with clear outcomes conveys more efficacy information than if the effects of the modeled
actions remain ambiguous. In investigations of vicarious processes, observing one perform
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 20 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
activities that meet with success does; indeed, produce greater behavioral improvements
than witnessing the same performances modeled without any evident consequences.
Diversified modeling, in which the activities observers regard as hazardous are repeatedly
shown to be safe by a variety of models, is superior to exposure to the same performances
by a single model. If people of widely differing characteristics can succeed, then observers
have a reasonable basis for increasing their own sense of self-efficacy.
3.3. Conceptual food choice model
As Furst et al. discuss „the choices people make among foods determine which nutrients
enter the body, and influence food production systems through consumer demand. Specific
food choices lay the groundwork for long term food habits. The food choice process
incorporates not only decisions based on conscious reflection, but also those that are
automatic, habitual and subconscious“. (Furst et al, 1996)
Furst et al. have developed a conceptual model on food choice. This model is presented
below in the Fig nr. 4.
Figure nr.4: A conceptual food choice model (Furst et al, 1996)
Study conducted by Furst revealed some main/dominant factors, which were grouped to
three basic categories: life course, influences and personal systems. However, these factors
don’t stand alone in the decision process, the relationship of these components with each
other or all together generates the process and leads to the final choosing point.
The life course includes the personal roles and the social, cultural and physical
environments with which person is related, or living in. Every person’s life course
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 21 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
generates influences: „ideals, personal factors, resources, social framework and food
context”. Individuals get the information from those influences and shape their personal
systems including “conscious value negotiations and unconsciously operationalized
strategies that may occur in a food-related choice situation”. This model emphasizes the
general nature of food choice processes. However, some of the factors might be more
important for particular people in special situations. Therefore the model proposes both
processes – the one which might be more considered and the automatic ones.
Life course can be perceived as the main and the most universal determinant influencing
food choice, which encompass past influences, personal experiences, current involvement
in trends and even historical eras. When talking about life course, people usually refer to
their habits, saying that they either eat as they do because they are used to it, or if the usual
way was not acceptable, they change their habits once they have opportunity – e.g. when
moving to live separately from their parents.
The model developed by Furst et al suggests that life course leads to the influences which
include following categories: ideals, personal factors, resources, social framework and food
context. These categories either shaped each another, or reinforced towards the final
decision in the food choice. Ideals included expectations, standards, hopes and beliefs.
Standards might include the specific meals, which are eaten in some occasion, such as
‘birthday cakes’ or some meals – e.g. turkey eaten in Thanksgiving.
As Furst et al found out, “personal factors was another influence to emerge as central to
food choice, and reflected what was salient and meaningful to individuals based on needs
and preferences derived from psychological and physiological traits. Personal factors
shaped the boundaries of food choices that a person was willing to make, and included
likes/dislikes, individual food-styles, food centeredness and emotions; as well as
characteristics like gender, age, health status, sensory preferences (or taste sensitivities) and
state of hunger” (Furst et al, 1996).
„Personal factors incorporated cravings, preferences for particular foods or types of foods,
and aversions. The resources available to people making food choices were an influential
component of the decision process. Resources were tangible, such as money, equipment
and space, as well as intangible, in the form of skills, knowledge and time”. Resources were
defined as available and unavailable, which in first case worked as motivator and as the
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 22 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
boundary in the second. Money appeared to be very important tangible resource, since the
amount and availability of them have an impact of scope and nature of food choice (Furst,
et al, 1996).
Another tangible resources included in food choice was equipment such as big freezer, or
bread making machine, etc.
„When making food choices, people were influenced by the composition and dynamics of
their social framework, which often raised issues of conflicting priorities, including power
issues”. That could also be related with reference groups, which means that food choice or
dietary pattern are adopted if their relatives, friends or colleagues are already practicing that
diet or/and if they get enough support from family members and peers. The third factor
which occurred in Furst’s study was food context. Authors define it as “which provided the
environment for food choices that occur in specific behavior settings to which food is
supplied by the larger societal food system. The food context encompassed the physical
surroundings and social climate of the choice setting, and specific food supply factors in the
environment such as types of food, food sources and availability of foods in the food
system, including seasonal or market factors.”
Repeated behavior while making a food choice related decision leads to development of
personal systems. As Furst et al. argues, “personal systems had two major components: (1)
value negotiations that involved weighing of different
considerations in making food
choices; and (2) strategies that involved choice patterns based on previously resolved
deliberations that had become habitual” (Furst et al, 1996)
3.4. Food choice motives
The food choice motives as a topic have gotten the most attention in the end of 80’s and
beginning of the 90’s. Previous studies have found various motives explaining people’s
food choice. Those motives vary from practical determinants, such as price and
convenience to the temporary ones – mood, impulsive buying, as well as sensory appeals –
taste, texture, and personal attitudes: health, weight control, ethical motives. In the deeper
level, and within the context of consumer behaviour, two ways of how values can influence
food choice exist. The first way is through motivation to start particular choice processes,
e.g. to cook with meat. The second way will arise from the fact, that first choice might have
plenty possibilities, so individual will need to narrow its choice by picking particular kind
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 23 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
of meat. As Hoogland et al notice, „motivations and criteria are two routes through which
relatively abstract values, such as a general preference for equity, can give rise to the use of
specific evaluative criteria, such as animal welfare in making food choices”. (Hoogland et
al, 2005)
As it can be seen from literature review, motives to choose one or another particular food
might differ. However, as I will discuss later in this section of the work, it is possible to
determine several main determinants in food choice.
From the time a human is born, food (milk or formula) functions as a source of nutrition.
With the process of growth, children learn other taste of food, and with cognitive learning
process realize what is eatable and what is not from their point of view. In other words,
food progresses from being the nutritional source and sensory pleasure, to the „being of
social marker, an aestethic experience, a source of meaning and metaphor and often a moral
entity“. (Rozin, 1996)
Many food marketers would suggest that ‘taste, value for money, convenience and
healthiness’ are key ‘end of chain’ attributes that influence consumers’ choice of foods.
Certainly, this is a useful short list. (Worsley, 2000). However, even though it might seem
as quite convenient way using these attributes, problems arises when trying to examine
them in the more detail way. That means that perception of those attributes might be, and
usually is different for each individual. E.g. the attractive taste for one person might be
aversive to another; the perception of healthy food might be different too, meaning that one
might be sure that to get protein is only possible from meat, and another be convinced that
meat makes more damage than use for the health.
Most people attempt to change an aspect of their health behavior at some time whether it be
to stop smoking, drink less alcohol, exercise more often or practice safer sex. For some,
these intentions are translated in successful behavior change. For many, however, such
intentions never result in actual behavior change or may do so only in the short term
(Ogden, et al 2007). That lets me make an assumption, that in order to succeed in the
behavioral change, individual must have very strong motivation to engage in different
behavior.
In terms of eating behavior, research has also shown that the intention to eat healthily is a
successful predictor of subsequent behavior (Ogden, et al 2007). Therefore individuals,
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 24 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
who intent to act, e.g. to eliminate meat from their eating pattern, usually does so earlier or
later. Study conducted by Sutton revealed, that the intentions generally predict between 19
to 38 % of the variance in the actual behavior (Sutton, 1998). This implies that intentions
might be useful predictors of successfully dietary pattern.
As Boer discusses, “although values are specifically defined as criteria that enable people to
guide selection and justification of actions, many actions are only indirectly related to
values. This applies in particular to food choices, where very strong habits and preferences
may create favored combinations of use situations, meals, products and ingredients. The
indirect impacts of values may operate via involvement, attitudes and closely related
concepts, including lifestyles and knowledge structures motives and criteria, goals and
goal-derived categories and regulatory focus” (Boer, .2009)
Mooney et al (2001) claim that research investigating personal motives and cognitive
mechanisms involved in the process of food selection has identified a number of salient
value guiding food choices. Health values serve as primary influences on food selection and
include factors relating to disease avoidance and feelings of well-being. Other factors such
as taste and convenience concerns about specific ingredients, and age and sex may also
determine decisions to choose or prefer particular foods. While a wide range of reasons for
food selection exists among varied populations, the human food selection process remains a
complex and not entirely understood phenomenon.
Later in their paper, authors talk, that process of what to eat or not to eat, comes from the
childhood as learning process. However, with age, learning process becomes more
complicated, and therefore does the food choice. One of the reasons to avoid or eliminate
meat from individuals eating pattern might be their knowledge about how animals are
raised for food, and what impact does meat have on their health.
As Boer claims, „just as maintaining health is a primary factor people take into account
when choosing their food, it is also likely to be an important influence on actively avoiding
foods.”
Health factor might also be expanded by individual’s intention to control their weight. Even
though several studies have shown, that it is more actual to the women, male subjects
sometimes make their food choice based on this factor. As Mooney explains, “the
importance of having an ideal body in our society has leaded both men and women to
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 25 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
express unhappiness with their bodies and to increase dieting behavior. Even among groups
for whom restrictive eating behavior may conflict with their social norms, methods that
allow them to diet unobtrusively are found. Just as a weight control factor exists as a food
selection motive, conscientious rejection of certain foods may illustrate one's use of selfdiscipline to achieve control over weight and shape and hence, one's perceived physical
attractiveness (Mooney, 2001).
Studies by Connors et al, investigates five primary values, consumers are looking for while
choosing food. Those values are: taste, health, costs, time and social relationships, and
some secondary ones, such as ethics, which are about to be discussed in the next section of
the project.
According to Mooney, consumer groups and members of the food industry have noted that
consumers not only reject foods based on health and weight concerns, but also consider the
ethical implications surrounding food choice and consumption. Ethical reasons for foodrelated decisions may best be divided into two distinct concerns:
a) those related to environmental issues, and
b) those related to animal rights.
The environmental approach to the food rejection can be explained claiming, that modern
eating pattern is ecologically wasteful and sends a warning, that this food contains hidden
contaminants, which appear in the producing process.
The use of pesticides and other chemicals to ensure faster cycle of product growth often
ends up in the water pollution and other long-term negative consequences to the
environment.
Second dimension of food ethicality is concern about animal rights. Environmental
conscious omnivores pay attention to the circumstances animals were raised, and even
killed – searching for those, which was killed humanly, if killing ever can be described so.
However, „a measurable portion of the vegetarian community cites killing animals as the
central force in the decision to abstain from meat”.
The research conducted by Mooney showed, that the general taste and disgust reasons for
the food rejection might be expanded adding health, weight, ethics and unnatural content
factors.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 26 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Mooney reported some earlier researches, which showed, that “food choices maybe more
strongly motivated by weight goals than by health concerns.” Later authors explain “while
health concerns were more important reasons for avoiding food when compared to concerns
about the ingredients and in some cases even the taste of the food, they did not, on the
average, override concerns about weight when choosing to refrain from a particular food”.
Based on an integration of insights from the aforementioned theories, four groups of
determinants that predict intention have been recognized: attitudes, self-representation, selfefficacy and social influences. According Brug, attitudes are based on a subjective
weighing of expected positive and negative consequences or outcomes of the behavior.
Closely related constructs are decisional balance, outcome expectations and perceived
threat. Beliefs or expectations about short-term outcomes are more important than longer
term outcomes. Taste, satiety and pleasure are short-term outcomes of major importance for
most people. First of all, people tend to eat what they like and avoid foods they dislike.
Certain taste preferences are innate, such as a liking for sweet and salt and a dislike for
bitter. However, taste preferences can be learned and unlearned, and the fact that many
people like the taste of coffee and beer illustrates that we can even unlearn our innate
dislike of bitter tastes. Learning to like and dislike certain tastes are basic classical and
operant conditioning processes, and we quickly learn to like the taste of foods that are
reinforced by the pleasant feeling of satiety (taste-nutrient learning), that are eaten in
pleasant surroundings or with pleasant company (taste-environment learning) and of foods
that are combined with a taste that we already have a strong liking for (taste–taste learning).
(Brug, 2008)
Health is a second category of outcome expectations of major importance for people’s food
choice. Nevertheless, 40% of Americans and 57% of Europeans indicated rarely or never to
compromise on taste to improve the healthfulness of their diets. Self-representations or selfidentity reflect what a person thinks of as important and stable characteristics of the self,
i.e. the values and norms people adhere to. Less research has been conducted on selfrepresentation than on attitudes related to food choice, but some personal values have been
shown to be related to nutrition behaviours. People may see themselves, for example, as
health conscious, environmental conscious or animal friendly. Such personal norms may
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 27 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
induce specific dietary habits such as healthy eating, choosing organically grown foods or
adopting a vegetarian diet.
Based on Angelo framework, there are four types of environment. Those include physical,
economic, political and socio-cultural. Brug explains these as following. „The physical
environment refers to availability of opportunities for healthy and unhealthy choices, such
as points-of-purchase for fruits and vegetables, soft drink vending machines, availability of
low saturated fat spreads in worksite cafeterias, etc. The economic environment refers to
the costs related to healthy and unhealthy behaviors, such as the costs of soft drinks, fruits
and vegetables or energy-dense snacks. The political environment refers to the rules and
regulations that may influence food choice and eating behavior. Bans on soft drink vending
machines in schools, rules on what treats can and cannot be brought to school, nutrition
policies in worksites and institutions and also family food rules are examples of political
environmental factors. The socio-cultural environment refers to the social and cultural
subjective and descriptive norms and other social influences such as social support for
adoption of health behavior and social pressure to engage in unhealthy habits.
As Boer claims, “although values are specifically defined as criteria that enable people to
guide selection and justification of actions, many actions are only indirectly related to
values. This applies in particular to food choices, where very strong habits and preferences
may create favoured combinations of use situations, meals, products and ingredients. The
indirect impacts of values may operate via involvement, attitudes and closely related
concepts, including lifestyles and knowledge structures motives and criteria, goals and
goal-derived categories and regulatory focus.
Mooney et al (2001) claim, that research investigating personal motives and cognitive
mechanisms involved in the process of food selection has identified a number of salient
value guiding food choices. Health values serve as primary influences on food selection and
include factors relating to disease avoidance and feelings of well-being. Other factors such
as taste and convenience concerns about specific ingredients, and age and sex may also
determine decisions to choose or prefer particular foods. While a wide range of reasons for
food selection exists among varied populations, the human food selection process remains a
complex and not entirely understood phenomenon.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 28 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Later in their paper, authors talk, that process of what to eat or not to eat, comes from the
childhood as learning process. However, with age, learning process becomes more
complicated, and therefore does the food choice. One of the reasons to avoid or eliminate
meat from individuals eating pattern might be their knowledge about how animals are
raised for food, and what impact does meat have on their health.
In my opinion, it is relevant to mention organic food consumption motives, since the
experiences show, that people who decide to buy organic food products, sooner or later
choose at least to try vegetarian eating pattern. Makatouni (2002) notices that factors
influencing organic food choice consumption falls into three categories, which are:
1) values which are centred around human being;
2) values which are centred around animals’ well being;
3) values centred around environment.
As Makatouni discusses, category about human being involves values such as
responsibility for health and well being of self and family members, feelings of relaxation
and satisfaction, nostalgia, longer and happy life.
However, it can be clearly seen, that „animal lives and human life being is highly correlated
not only due to animal welfare issues, but mainly due to the impact, that the animals’ life
can have on human life” (Makatouni, 2002). Therefore the second main category
concerning food choice is around animal’s welfare, including values such as ‘happy
animals provide healthy products’. This can be interpreted that concerns about ethicality of
animal food involves not only an animal per se, but the effect which animal has on human
being. (Makatouni, 2002)
Study conducted by the author revealed, that „there are also values related to environment,
especially when the effects of pesticides and the consequences of the imports of organic
foods are concerned. Moreover, by protecting environment, parents believe, their family’s
well-being as they want their children to be brought up on a healthy planet and later inherit
it. This supports their beliefs that any destruction of environmental balance will have
effects in terms of human well-being and well-living“(Makatouni, 2002).
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 29 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
4. Concept of vegetarianism
In the above section of the work, several theories and approaches concerning food choice in
general have been discussed and analyzed. However, in this section I will try to discuss
what vegetarianism is, to provide a classification of vegetarians and to find out why people
make a decision to eliminate meat from their eating patterns. Even though vegetarianism
together with increased attention to environmental rights might seem a new and trendy
concept, it is not so. The first most famous vegetarian, called a father of vegetarianism was
Pythagoras. Of course, he was not the only one. Many other great men followed
vegetarianism over the centuries, such as Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519); Benjamin
Franklin (1706-1790); Dr. J.H. Kellogg (1869-1948); Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948) and
Albert Einstein (1879-1955).The term vegetarian was popularized in 1847 by the
Vegetarian Society, a secular British organization that espoused the benefits of adopting a
vegetarian lifestyle. (Dwyer, 1988)
Smart refers to early findings of vegetarianism and says “term vegetarianism, coined in
1840’s, refers to an ideology that argues that eating meat is wrong. Vegetarianism was
founded on a moral objection against using animals for food and reasoned justifications
about the diet’s benefits to health and efficiency in food production“. (Smart, 2004).
Twigg perceptively defines vegetarian ideology, saying “the vegetarians choose to eat far
away from the ambivalent animal power. But there is a deeper ambiguity present.
Vegetarians do not eat meat because it makes you one in substance and action with animal
nature; it stokes the fires of an abhorrent animality. But vegetarians also reject meat
because we are one with nature and thus to do so is cannibalistic and horrible. Vegetarians
have an ambiguous attitude to nature: they both fear it and desire to be with it”. (Twigg,
1979 )
However, over time, definition and perception of vegetarians and vegetarianism changed,
but still concern about nature and willingness to do as little as possible harm to self or the
environment stayed as a core value while adopting vegetarian eating pattern.
Donna Maurer reports meaning of vegetarian not as someone who eats meat, but as a stem
from Latin word vegetus, which refers to „whole, sound, fresh and lively“.
„Among young people today, the term „vegetarian“ reflect someone who is health-aware,
health-educated and eating in a modern, maybe even trendy way. It‘s become a positive
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 30 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
label, a positive statement about yourself“ – announces Chip Walker in American
Demographic Business Reports (1995).
Morris & Kirwan describes vegetarianism as „the exclusion of certain food products from
the diet. These are, most notably, flesh foods – meat, poultry, game, fish and sea food – but
also, for other vegetarians, dairy products and eggs, or the by-products of slaughtering such
as gelatin and animal fat“ (Morris, Kirwan,2006 ).
For some individuals meat is a symbol of dead and decay food, while vegetarian food is
perceived to be “pure and full of essence of life” (Twigg, 1983).
Idealistic approach to vegetarianism is as follows „it valorizes biocentric attitude to the
environment in which humans live in harmony with each other and with natural world
around them“.
It is hard to specify a term “vegetarian”. It is used to describe a wide range of diets,
practicing various degrees of restriction. The term ‘vegetarian’ encompasses a broad range
of eating patterns with potential different implications in health. It is not uncommon that
individuals who claim themselves as vegetarians eventually eat meat. Unfortunately, there
is no exact definition of the term ‘vegetarian’ on several scientific studies, although
researchers might classify individuals based on their reported dietary intake and not on how
people would call themselves or their diets.
4.1. Classification of vegetarians
Usually, the term vegetarian refers to an individual, who does not eat any type of meat.
However, the classification of vegetarians and their diets’ definition depends on which
animal-based products are included in the diet. In the following section I will discuss the
most common types of vegetarians, and products included in their eating patterns.
Vegetarians may be referred to as ‘semi/demi’-vegetarian, if they merely exclude meat.
Other categories include: lacto-ovo vegetarian, if they exclude meat, fish and poultry but
eat eggs and milk products; lacto-vegetarian, if they exclude all animal foods except milk
and milk products; and vegan, if they exclude all foods of animal origin (S.A. LanhamNew, et al, 2007).
Beardsworth and Keil defines vegetarianism as „a spectrum of inter-related food selection
and food avoidance patterns, ranging from strict veganism at one end to much looser forms
at other, which may allow fish or even poultry”. They write, that “vast majority of west
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 31 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
vegetarians are converts (often self-converts) who have made a conscious choice to reject
certain aspects of orthodox foodways, having subjected them to critical scrutiny”
(Beardsworth & Keil, 1998).
The term vegetarian refers to the individuals, who switch to vegetarian diet. Within the
modern food system, vegetarianism takes many forms, and can be seen as ranged on a
continuum from most strict (i.e. veganism) to much less strict forms which many entail the
routine consumption of animal products like milk and eggs, and occasionally even fish and
white meat (Beardsworth and Keil, 1992).
Furthermore, vegetarians are classified by the food included in their menu. Vegans
consume only fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, seeds and grains. Lacto- and ovovegetarians include milk products or eggs, respectively, but otherwise consume a plantbased diet. Lacto–ovo vegetarians include eggs and dairy products and avoid other animal
products. Semi vegetarians include eggs and dairy products, some fish and/or poultry but
avoid red meat. (L.S. Greene-Finestone, et.al, 2008).
Eating pattern also helps to classify vegetarians. The diet of ovo- lacto vegetarians is based
on grains, legumes, vegetables, fruits, nuts, dairy products and eggs while it excludes beef,
fish and poultry. The eating pattern of strict vegetarians is similar to ovo - lactovegetarians
except for the additional exclusion of eggs, dairy products and other foods of animal origin.
Within each pattern, there might be considerable variation with regard to the extent in
which animal products are excluded. Therefore, an individual approach is necessary to
accurately assess the nutritional quality of the dietary intake of a vegetarian. However,
there is a new group of individuals called semi-vegetarians by some authors. According to
Fraser, semi-vegetarians are those who eat fish and meat less than once a week. (Couicero
et al, 2008).
There are some more rare forms of vegetarians, not widely mentioned in literature. One
refers to fruitarians, who strictly limit their food choice to fruits, nuts, seeds, honey and
olive oils. As it can be seen from the definitions discussed above, it is hard to define
vegetarianism in few sentences, but basically it refers to philosophy, when individual
decide to eliminate or reduce animal based products from eating pattern, no matter for
which reasons.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 32 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
4.2. Vegetarian food choice determinants
Even though it might look like vegetarian food choice motives would be quite similar to the
motives influencing any other food choice, there are some differences, which will be
discussed and analyzed in the following section of this work. In this section two terms
might be found: animal-based and vegetarian eating pattern. The term ‘animal based’ refers
to products such as meat, or any other products, containing traces of animal food, such as
animal fat. ‘Vegetarian eating’ refers to a diet, where meat is strictly eliminated.
Term ‘vegetarian’ is usually perceived as an individual, who doesn’t eat meat due to
concern for animals. However, “in contrast to the characteristics of pure moral, health and
ethical vegetarians, there seem to be more personal and emotional reasons for adapting to
meat-less eating, one such reason being increased body concern” (Kubberød, et al, 2001).
As authors perceptually notice, there are plenty of reasons to adopt vegetarian eating
pattern, and the most common ones, which have been reviewed in the literature will be
presented in the following paragraphs of this chapter.
Harker et al (2010) proposes a food choice model (Fig 8) which in my opinion might be
applied to vegetarian food choice determinants.
Fig 8: Food choice motives (Harker et al.)
As various studies show, respondents state health as one of the dominant reasons to adopt
vegetarian diet. They refer either to the articles, where they read about long process of meat
digesting in their stomachs, or personal experience, saying that after they ate meat, they felt
like there was a stone lying in their stomach.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 33 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Couicero et al., explains health motive as following „this is the key reason outside Brazil
for people to adopt a vegetarian diet. There is a strong consensus that the vegetarian diet is
healthier than a diet that includes food of animal origin. Over the last 20 years,
epidemiological studies have documented important and significant benefits of
vegetarianism and other diets based on vegetables, which reduce the risk of many noncommunicable chronic diseases as well as the total risk of mortality” (Couicero et al, 2008).
Even though mood might not be the strongest long lasting motivator, it still can function as
a short-term determinant while choosing vegetarian food.
Convienence might work against individual‘s decision to choose vegetarian food, or
become vegetarian, since there is existing belief, that it is less time consuming to prepare
meat products, especially when there is a lot of pre-ready frozen supplies, which takes up to
five minutes to get them ready. Other factor might be an availability of vegetarian supplies
- e.g. the local grocery shop, which provides fresh vegetables every day.
Loss of weight goes really close with health reasons. There is a common belief especially
between women, that vegetarian diet can help them lose weight. This is due to a fact, that
“vegetarians eat more complex carbohydrates, which give a feeling of satiety and are
thought to offer at times a caloric rebate of as much as 25 percent, because of the amount of
energy the body expends to store and use the calories not immediately needed“ (Kummer,
1991).
Ethical concern is the most concrete and closely related motive concerning vegetarian food
choice. As Schroder distinguishes, „the intention to avoid meat between meat eaters arises
from feelings of guilt, what results in avoiding purchase of specific products – such as veal
meat, or battery caged eggs”. (Schroder, 2004 ) The basic concept of ethical vegetarians is,
that they want to minimise harm to animals for food or any other reasons. Usually
becoming an ethical vegetarian is a sudden process, when they want to support their beliefs
in animal welfare or create a harmony and consistency in their lives. However, ethical
concern plays an important role among non-vegetarian individuals making food choice as
well. As Hoogland explains, „nowadays, people want cattle to be kept in a way that allows
them to follow their natural drives, to interact with other animals, and to eat appropriate
fodder. Also people feel the physical integrity of cattle must be respected, i.e. the clipping
of ears, beaks, horns, and tails is rejected” (Hoogland et al, 2005).
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 34 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
It goes without saying that attitudes towards healthy eating depends strongly on each
individual. What one individual perceives as healthy food, others might disagree.
Concerning vegetarian food, the objection usually considers version about proteins and iron
which might only be get together with meat. However, the strongest belief individual has,
the strongest is intention to engage in particular behaviour, in this case - eliminate or no
meat from their eating patterns.
Natural content covers both animal-based and vegetarian eating patterns. Natural content is
defined as products which have no additives and contains only natural ingredients. This can
be applied to both eating patterns, since even being vegetarians; people might choose fruits
and vegetables which have been produced using pesticides. However the main argument
among vegetarians why they eliminate meat from their eating patterns usually refers to the
fact, that meat is produced way unnaturally, using hormones and antibiotics which
stimulate faster growth in animals, and afterwards is processed using chemicals in order to
assure longer period of meat staying fresh.
Most consumers states prices as the main or at least dominant determinant while making
food choice. Price is relative motive for low-income individuals, they often cite price as the
most important factor making food choice. (Pigford et al., 2008) In my opinion price might
work as an obstacle to obtain vegetarian diet, since good quality vegetables cost more, and
it also depends on the season.
Sensory appeal is not dominant, but common factor influencing food choice. Santos and
Booth
found that dislike of meat and disgust with ``bloody'' and ``raw'' meat were
frequently mentioned among meat restrainers and vegetarians as reasons for avoiding flesh
food. (Santos, Booth, 1996).
This fact supports life course factor mentioned before.
Beadsworth and Keil explain „eating more vegetarian foods after moving from home to
university, mainly among women, could possibly be a result of no longer being under the
traditional control of food exerted by parents”(Beadsworth & Keil, 1992). This is later
explained by authors, that flesh could raise awareness of dead animal, and stimulate the
need to touch raw pieces of meat, what can be easily avoided when cooking is carried by
others. However, physical characteristics of the food, such as smell, texture and taste might
serve as determinants to reject meat (Beadsworth & Keil, 1992) .
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 35 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
On the other hand, sensory appeal of liking meat includes attributes such as good smell,
good taste and fact that meals made from meat is juicy (Kubberød et al, 2002).
For some individuals, familiarity is an important factor affecting food choice. Familiarity
refers to an individual’s satisfaction with respect to consuming their usual diet rather than
exploring new food choices (Steptoe et al., 1995).
Social and environmental influences make an impact on food choice as well. Media might
work as one of these influences as well. Keanne & Willets mention one more factor, not
found, or just vaguely discussed in other literature – media. They argue, that „when looking
at food choice we cannot ignore the influence of the media. Advertising aimed at children is
a particular concern. The majority of television adverts aimed at children are for food or
drink. Of these 75 per cent are for products with a high sugar or fat content. Through the
use of cartoon characters, media personalities and snappy jingles adverts can be effective in
establishing consumer loyalty at a very young age” (Keanne & Willets, 1994). In this case
media works against vegetarianism since children will get used to the fast food promoted
by adverts, and they consciously deny benefits of healthy eating. On the other hand, if
media would concentrate on emphasizing cons of vegetarianism, it might work as stimulus
to encourage in reducing the amount of meat in their meals. Moreover, with the simplified
access to the internet, and the big range of availability of information, such as scientific
publications and specialized discussion boards, people have no problem to find needed data
themselves and make the decision.
Concerning the environmental influences, there is a belief, that eliminating meat of the
eating pattern might reduce the overusing of resources. As Boer discusses, „modern
patterns of food consumption are overusing our natural resources. Particularly relevant here
are people's meat choices. Food production will cause much less pressure on crucial
resources (i.e. energy, water, bio- diversity), human health and animal welfare, if people in
Western countries choose to eat smaller quantities of meat as well as types of meat that are
produced in a more responsible way, such as organic or free-range meat”. They argue, that
“insights and instruments based on conventional economics fail to improve consumers'
ability to live better by consuming less and reduce their impact on the environment in the
process” (Boer et al, 2009).
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 36 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Even though it might seem contradictory, some vegetarians state world hunger as a reason
influencing their decision to adopt vegetarian diet. Coicero et al discusses „world hunger is
an issue of enormous proportions. Almost one fourth of the world population does not have
enough to eat. In spite of that, 40 to 60 million individuals starve to death or die from other
diseases as a consequence of hunger. Many people choose a vegetarian diet in order to
somehow contribute to reducing world hunger, since to produce two pounds of meat, ten
pounds of grains are necessary” (Coicero et al, 2008).
Economics and religion might also be involved in social and environmental influences. As
Coicero discusses, „a major part of the world population subsists on vegetarian or almost
vegetarian diets simply because they cannot afford meat. Economics can shape political
decisions and force the choice of food.” (Coicero et al, 2008).
Even though some restrictions in the religion might seem as a factor encouraging people to
adopt vegetarian diet, usually the reasons that lead a religious institution to recommend this
kind of diet are based on health issues or on the belief that killing is strongly wrong.
Life course factor mentioned above falls under the category of individual and interpersonal
influences. However, sometimes the individual itself doesn’t stand behind the decision, the
interested party needs a push from the environment they are living in. The impact made by
friends or parents is called reference group influence. Reference group might work in both
ways – promoting or neglecting the intention to adopt vegetarian eating pattern. The first
case scenario have been proved by a study conducted by Worsley and Skrzypiec, which
revealed that female Australian vegetarian teenagers tended to have relatives – sisters or
mothers who were also vegetarians. Other possible source of influence was known
vegetarians, not necessary friends (1998). As it can be seen females are available to
recognize similar patterns and take actions to adopt them.
In the second case, parents or other people around individual might work as a restriction to
adopt vegetarian diet. As Keanne & Willets say, „while unity is very much the ideal, in
reality we all know that food and eating can be an area of conflict in the household. Social
scientists have shown that food is unequally distributed within the family and that food
choice is often dictated by the preferences of one powerful member, usually ‘the man of the
house’.” (Keanne & Willets, 1994).
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 37 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
However, even though the model proposed by Harker looks suitable and comfortable to use
to find motivations behind vegetarian food choice, it has some drawbacks. First of all, it
doesn’t exclude vegetarian food choice in particular; it might as well be used to find the
determinants influencing any other food choice.
Beadsworth and Keili name vegetarianism as a challenge and divide it in several categories,
which are as stated in the following:
„nutritional – meat is argued to be unsuitable food for humans, being seen as ‚heavy‘,
causing digestive problems, as well as having negative implications for health“. Meanwhile
vegetarian foods „are characterized as full of vitality“ (Beadsworth & Keil, 1993).
Moral challenge is described as „rearing, transporting and slaughter of food animals is
challenged on moral grounds in that it is regarded as entailing unacceptable suffering or
violation of animal rights (Beadsworth & Keil, 1993).
Spiritual challenge means, that „ingestion of meat, and especially of blood is seen as
compromising spirituality and inflaming animal passions“. (Beadsworth & Keil, 1993)
Ecological challenge involves a concern about animal rights. According authors, „animal
husbandry is seen as ecologically damaging and resource-extravagant compared with the
production of plant-stuffs with people as primary consumers“. (Beadsworth & Keil, 1993).
5. Concept of mean-ends chain analysis
This part of the thesis will introduce readers to the basic concept of mean-ends chain
theory, which is essential for the empirical part of present study. MEC theory have been
created to develop a model which would help researchers to get a better insight of
consumer behavior. In general, „means-end chain theory models the consumption-related
part of consumers’ cognitive structures, that is, their mental associations between perceived
product attributes, self-relevant consequences and personal values” (Thogersen;Bredahl,
2009) . However, this theory will be presented in more detailed way in the following
section.
As Gutman mentions, „means are objects (products) or activities in which people engage
(running, reading). Ends are valued states of being such as happiness, security,
accomplishment. A means-end chain is a model that seeks to explain how a product or
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 38 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
service selection facilitates the achievement of desired end states. Such a model consists of
elements that represent the major consumer processes that link values to behavior”
(Gutman, 1982). As author suggests, „the model is based on two fundamental assumptions
about consumer behavior:
(1) that values, defined here as desirable end-states of existence, play a dominant role in
guiding choice patterns;
(2) that people cope with the tremendous diversity of products that are potential satisfiers of
their values by grouping them into sets or classes so as to reduce the complexity of choice.
In other words, MEC theory explains product-consumer relationships within the context of
terminal values that represents the core of consumer-self (Lin, Fu, 2001).
„The means–end chain (MEC) model is based on expectancy-value theory. Consumers’
actions in choosing to consume or use products or services (and their attributes) produce
outcomes. Consumers learn which outcomes they desire and which they are willing to
avoid. Once they learn which acts produce desired or undesired outcomes, their choice
behavior is guided accordingly” (Gutman, 1982). This process results in consumer’s ability
to acquire information and relate products and services to their attributes, acknowledge
consequences resulting from the use of those products and recognizing methods, helping
them to achieve their personal values.
Figure 9: Source: adopted from (Gutman, 1997)
In the model attributes might be both physical/concrete as well as abstract. Concrete
attributes involve tangible elements, such as size, colour and other physical characteristics
of the product. Abstract attributes are e.g., style or quality of the product. In the higher
level of abstraction, product attributes relate to the functional consequences, sometimes
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 39 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
tangible, such as loss of weight, or saving money. Physical or social consequences usually
involve emotions: feeling good, or attracted, and sometimes even reach more abstract levels
in association with the products. The highest level of abstraction product can be related to
the values both instrumental and terminal, such as higher self-esteem, or happiness (Lin,
Fu, 2001).
Goals might be described as pleasant – desirable consequences or unpleasant – avoidable
consequences. „Goals provide the primary motivating and directing factor for consumer
behavior. Consumer choice can be regarded as a person’s movement through a goal
hierarchy.” (Gutman; 1997). Actions are influenced by goals, because goals represent the
benefits which consumers are searching for. Divergence among the present state and the
desired one is what motivates people to act. The plan of actions is guided by goals in regard
to activating procedural knowledge, which is further used to achieve the goals and asses the
progress while doing so. To this extent, „MEC can be conceptualized as a goal hierarchy
with product goals at lower levels linked to important personal goals at higher levels”
(Gutman, 1997).
However, even though engagement in the vegetarianism might be supported by the goal to
ensure animal welfare or gain health benefits, the more relevant is to look at the values
attached to particular vegetarian products.
To sum up what have been said in this chapter, MEC theory is the method, which helps to
answer following question, with an aim to find explanation to questions such as:

Which elements of the product are to be considered, when making a purchasing
decision?

Why is it important to consider those elements and which particular elements are
related to values or consequences in the consumers’ mind?

What are the attributes, values and consequences after the purchasing the product
and how it makes impact on the levels of MEC?
5.1. Laddering technique
One of most frequently used approaches to explain mean-ends is laddering technique. This
method is based on giving respondent a series of ‘why’ questions, typically starting with
the most distinctive alternatives. „The objective of laddering is to elicit as complete a chain
as possible stemming from an initial act” (Gutman, 1997).
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 40 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
„Laddering refers to an in-depth, one-on-one interviewing technique used to develop an
understanding of how consumers translate the attributes of products into meaningful
associations with respect to self, following Means-End Theory” (Gutman, 1982). Laddering
consists firstly of asking series of ‘why is it important to you’ questions with the aim to
define linkages between elements across the sphere of attributes, consequences and values.
These association networks, also called ladders are indicated as perceptual orientations.
Perceptual orientations further represent a set of elements which work as principle to
separate different products in the same class. A ladder is defined as one participant’s
sequence of responses from attribute to a higher level of abstraction.
There are two approaches to the laddering technique – one called soft-laddering, and
another – hard laddering. Soft laddering is based on conducting interviews, while hard
laddering consists of handing in questionnaires (Russel et al, 2004). However, both of those
approaches have their advantages and disadvantages. In comparison to soft laddering, hardladdering is quicker, cheaper and more objective. Moreover, hard laddering enables
respondents to provide more than one reason why particular attribute is important to them
(Russel, et al, 2004 b).
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 41 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
6. Empirical part
Having established theoretical understanding of the problem in the previous chapters,
covering main aspects of environmental-conscious consumer behaviour, underlying
consumers’ motivations to choose vegetarian food and presenting reader with means-end
chain analysis in theoretical part, this will be followed by empirical study in this chapter.
To broaden the literature review, methodology part will provide research methods which
have been used to answer thesis research questions.
As McCullough discusses, „marketing research is an essential tool for business to gain vital
information on which to base sometimes critical business decisions“(McCullough, 1998).
Even though traditional market research is still used in the marketing practice, the webbased surveys gain superiority in several contexts. Firstly, the traditional marketing
research might require a lot of costs, but won‘t bring expected value to the research.
Secondly, the traditional research process might take too long, and that especially counts
for the companies producing high-tech products, meaning that in the final stage of the
research, information might be not relevant anymore. Internet-based research has quite
obvious advantages. Firstly, it allows to eliminate physical costs of the research. Secondly,
the absence of the interviewer gives more freedom to the respondent and assures more
accurate answers, or more relaxe answers when people are not confronted with the presence
of interviewer. Thirdly, it is not that much time consuming compared with the traditional
market research, it enables to get answers several times faster. One more advantage over
traditional marketing research is, that it allows to reach specific target group more easily, in
this case vegetarian people.(McCullough, 1998)
The research would consist from two parts, where the first one would present and discuss
content analysis on discussion boards, and the second one would elaborate on the first part
with follow up interviews integrating mean-end chain analysis, which is discussed in Part
III of these thesis.
Internet “provides access to an enormous pool of employed adults from many backgrounds
and organizational settings. Those individuals with the proper equipment and software,
either at work or at home, can now easily serve as respondents in applied research projects
without receiving, completing or returning a paper and pencil survey”. (Stanton, 1998)
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 42 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
„The Internet has a clear sampling advantage for populations that are difficult to access
because (1) the sample is difficult to bring to a laboratory, (2) the population is small, or (3)
group members are difficult to find” (Nosek, et al, 2002).
The specific method of the research has been selected based on two reasons:
1) Due to physical difficulty to reach the respondents – the content analysis is
conducted in Lithuania, while the author of this thesis is residing in Denmark;
2) The number of vegetarians is still relatively small in the country.
Based on the problem statement of the thesis, the main aim of empirical study is as follows:
To find out and elaborate on motivations underlying vegetarian food choice within the
context of attributes people attach to vegetarian based products.
In order to achieve this aim, it is divided in following study objectives:

To discover motivations leading people to choose vegetarian food;

To analyze why it is important to them;

To explore how motivations influence their perception of vegetarian food;

To identify which attributes people ascribe to vegetarian products.
6.1. Research approach
The second thing to acknowledge is which approach to the research would be taken, and
how study will be designed. Wagner classified the various qualitative research methods in
the following approaches:

motivation – „motivations refer to a very basic level of the psychological make-up
of human beings: it refers to the ‘why’ of human behaviour. A motivational
approach investigates predispositional and aspirational aspects of consumer
behaviour, such as needs, wants, desires, values, involvement, etc” (Mariampolski,
2001);

cognition - refers to understanding and learning. The cognitive approach examines
information processing and decision making behaviour. It addresses the question of
how understanding occurs, and how in turn understanding affects behaviour
(Wagner, 2003);

socio-demographics;
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011

social aspects;

life-style, etc” (Wagner, 2003).
Page 43 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
„The person may endorse several conflicting values at the same time. For example, an
individual who values both ‘hedonism’ and ‘security’ may indulge in an elaborate meal but
not if served in an apparently unhygienic setting. In sum, research on values and choice
behaviour must first specify both the motives and criteria under investigation and second
measure more than a single value” (Hoogland et al, 2005). Therefore, in order to explain
complicated motivations, the following approach of study of this thesis is selected. The
present study is a mix between the motivational and cognitive approaches, since motivation
to eliminate or reduce meat from their eating patterns might appear from adopting
information. Such approach leads to completion of objectives related to the motivation of
vegetarian food choice and attributes towards that choice. Moreover, the method of the
research in this thesis allows getting an insight from two sub-groups, since analysis is
conducted on two specialized discussion boards – the one intended to female, mostly
moms’ participants and other one created for vegetarians or vegetarian-oriented people.
6.2. Research methodology
There are two main ways to conduct a research: quantative and qualitative. Quantitative
method is used to determine the proportion of population which think or behave in
particular way. Quantitative research focuses on the precise numerical measurement of
attitudes and behavior, it is relative easy to conduct and understand (Keegan, 2009).
However, qualitative research is more complicated to define, but it explores questions such
as what, how and why rather focusing on meaning than numbers. Best definition for the
qualitative research is, that it is research with an aim to understand why individuals think
and behave as they do (Keegan, 2009). As Keegan (2009) outlines, the main features of
qualitative research are following:

It usually involves small samples of people, who might represent a population as a
whole, or who might represent a small section of general population – as in this
thesis, people choosing vegetarian food;

Qualitative research is person-centred, it attempts to understand the world of
individuals, participating in the research, how they view the world, and what and
why is important to them in that world;
Milda Dragunaite

Master Thesis, 2011
Page 44 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
It involves a high level of interpretation and synthesis of data by the researcher
within the research process, both the interaction with respondents and in the
analysis and presentation of research outcomes.
So, after consideration of both qualitative and quantitative researches’ advantages,
disadvantages and applicability to this particular thesis within an aim to identify
consumer’s motivations qualitative research was chosen.
Nosek et al mentions two features which affects limitation of participants. Those two
features are accessibility and type of advertising. Accessibility is divided to three following
options: open, specific and invited.
Open access means that anyone, who can be found on the internet and are able to find a
website in any possible way, such as banners, recommendation from a friend, or just
accidental visit to the page, has an opportunity to participate in the research.
Specific access refers to constraining participants before they take a survey, asking to
submit their age, gender or other demographic criteria.
The last option is invited accessibility, meaning that researcher would limit participants to
randomly selected sample, e.g. the ones participating in the special discussion boards and
would send them private invitation to participate in the survey (Nosek et al, 2002).
Since the aim of this study is to identify motivations behind vegetarian choice, specific
access option will be used, meaning that researcher – author of this thesis - would send a
personal email to the members of vegetarian discussion board, the explanation of this
choice will be given in the following section, asking to explain the motivations behind
participants’ food choice.
6.3. Research sample
The present research sample consisted of observation of participants in two Lithuanian
discussion boards. As a main source for the data collection, the biggest discussion board
www.supermama.lt/forumas have been selected. Created in 2003 in Lithuania, as a
community group aimed at moms, it expanded and now attracts 140624 various age and
gender members to discuss various topics. However, since forum still holds plenty of
womanly topics, the majority of members are female. For that reason, to support or
supplement findings, another discussion board – www.gyvunuteises.lt/forumas was
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 45 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
involved in the study. This forum is devoted mainly to the vegetarian/vegan and animal
rights’ issue, which contains about 200 active members.
The selection of these forums was made, because they seemed to be having most active and
having the biggest number of the members on the web. The language of communication in
these forums are participants’ native language – Lithuanian, however the data used in this
thesis will be translated to English.
Firstly the researcher observed ongoing discussion and collected information revealing the
reasons participants decide to adopt vegetarian diet (Appendix A)
During the recruitment, participants were asked to state if they are vegetarians, and which
products they eliminate from their diet with the purpose to identify how the eating pattern
affects values they ascribe to the products (Appendix B).
6.4. Research instrument, design and data collection
The original evaluation instrument has been developed with the respect to mean-ends chain
analysis concept, which has been presented to the readers in the previous chapters. The
instrument measures what motivates people to become vegetarians, why it is important to
them, and which attributes and values they assign to their choice.
The first stage of the research was to collect data from existing comments and group the
mentioned reasons accordingly with the respect to theoretical findings. To expand those
findings and understand participants’ motivations better, follow-up email interviews have
been sent. In the email, researcher introduced participants with herself, provided a small
introduction to the purpose of the research, and ensured anonymity. In order to understand
motivations better, and give participants freedom, the open-ended questions were asked,
however due to selected mean-end chain analysis technique, answers have been limited to
three reasons, so the better quality of analysis and discussion can be provided. Even though
the aim to draw the profile of vegetarian were set, due to sensitivity of personal information
within the internet context, questions regarding personal information were limited to
gender, age and educational level, which are most relevant to this research.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 46 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
6.5. Discussions
The content and mean-end chain analysis provided following motivations behind the food
choice. The discussions of these results are provided in following chapter. The overall
number of participants and the reasons they stated as motivations to adopt vegetarian diet is
graphically reflected in Fig 10:
19
20
15
13
15
10
4
1
5
0
Figure 10: Factors influencing vegetarian food choice
As it can be seen from the figure n, the main and most common reasons to adopt vegetarian
diet are animal welfare and health. However, in order to find out if the reasons differ from
personal values and people’s identity as well as theirs living environment, comparison of
the reasons in two different discussion boards are provided in the Fig. 11 below:
10
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
9
9
9
6
4
4
Forum to moms
1
0
0
Animal rights
Figure 11: The comparison of vegetarian motivations
As it can be seen from figure n the main motivation to adopt vegetarian eating pattern is
health and personal factors despite the purpose of discussion board itself, even though it
might have been expected that animal rights forum would have exceeding number of
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 47 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
respondents who are vegetarians due to ethical concern for the animals. The most relevant
and more detailed explanations of each motivation will be discussed in the following
paragraphs of this chapter, however the overall responses can be found in Appendix A.
6.5.1. Health
The single most mentioned factor in the mom’s forum was health. That might be explained
due to the fact that moms or young females want to be healthy and in the good condition to
be able to take care of their family and relatives. Respondents refer to the fact, that eating
meat makes a huge impact on their health, which results in physical symptoms, such as
digestive problems or headaches. Respondents, who state health to be their primary reason
for vegetarianism, seem to relate it to some other determinant of healthy-living, such as
quitting smoking or attempt to lose weight. One of respondents says, „ [...] decided to be a
pilot, but might sight seemed to be a problem.[...]a month before the physical examination I
started to eat carrots and drink their juice on daily basis, eat buckwheat porridge and the
only animal-based product butter. Since I experienced positive effects, I stayed on
vegetarian diet until now“.
Some of respondents refer to a heavy feeling in their digestive system, after they ate meat,
and mention, that they got rid of that feeling when eliminated meat from their eating
patterns. The responses usually consists of negative attributes attached to the meat, or the
consequences after eating meat such as „[...] I could feel it as a stone in my stomach all
day, had to take medicine everyday“ or „[...] the heavy feeling in the stomach, and other
digestive problems became unbearable [...]. Despite the hard time digesting meat, some
other negative physical consequences have been reported such as migraine or intesified
form of dermatitis. However, even though health is dominating reason, other motivations
underlying vegetarian food have appeared.
6.5.2 Animal welfare
Ethical concern about the animals was not the main, but however an important factor
among respondents. However, this determinant was almost equally important in both
discussion boards despite the targeted audience – in the forum designed for mom’s, 10
respondents stated animal concern as motivation to become vegetarian, where as 9
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 48 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
respondents distinguished this determinant in animal right forum. Besides the natural
concern for animals being killed for meat, another explanation among females and moms
might be that they have a natural instinct to care of others, even the animals. Respondents
give various explanations underlying ethical concern.
Usually it was related either to their experience on grandparents farms or movies and video
clips about the processes of animal slaughter, or the fact, that respondents had a pet
themselves and that evoke positive feelings towards all animals, even the ones they used to
eat before purchasing a pet. As one of the respondents mention, „I got insanely cute degu
and everything turned upside-down. I never had pets before, but then there is such a cute
creature next to me, to take a piece of meat seems unhuman and disgusting“. Another
respondent says „ [...] pigs have such a beautiful eyes, I never ate animals which I saw
alive [...]. Some respondents mention that even being a child, they disapproved eating
meat, but they were powerless to change anything „[...]in a farm I saw my grand-parent
sticking pig and was ready to take a knife and kill him instead [...]. As expected, this study
confirmed theoretical findings, that sometimes people have difficulties connecting the
prepared meal with meat with a live animal. This is justified by one female respondent from
animal rights discussion board „[...] i imagined, that they (animals) live in a big greenland,
and are killed with the newest painless technologies, [...] videos from PETA opened my
eyes [...]“. To sum up, once respondents realise the connection within the meat/prepared
meal, in most cases meat becomes unbearable for them to eat. So it actually might be
assumed, that concern about animal arises not for the animals, but for the individuals own
sake – i.e. unwillingness to eat dead animal.
6.5.3. Environmental concern
Even though environmental issues are the topic attracting public attention in Lithuania, it is
still relatively new. Despite this fact, four respondents from animal rights forum mentioned
environmental reasons as motivation to adopt vegetarian eating pattern. It means, that
people start to take responsibility for their actions, in this particular case, they are able to
realise how their own habits might affect the rest of the world. One female member
emphasises ecological concern in the following manner “[...]i became vegetarian for the
nature, not for the animals, even though these things are closely related [...], production of
meat, especially beef is damaging nature [...]”. Another female member argues her choice
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 49 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
within context of environmental concern “ [...] people studying environment protection,
they are activists and they educated me about the meat and other animal based production
damage for environment. In the other words, it takes a lot of resources to produce meat in
comparison with plant-based food [..]”. One more respondent explains “I think, that there
are enough food on this planet so we don‘t need to eat animals [...]“. As it could be seen
from the examples given above, the perception of protecting environment is still vague, but
it is awakening people’s attention.
6.5.4. Personal factors
Even though two main categories such as animal welfare and health stood out of the
possible reasons, personal factors played an important role motivating individuals to adopt
vegetarian eating pattern. Even though these motivations depend strongly from each
individual and are more personal than general, some consistency can be observed.
6.5.4. 1. Change of life course
As mentioned in the literature review in previous chapters of this work, change of life
course serves as a motivation for habitual change. This fact has been confirmed by
respondents within both discussion boards. As one respondent mentions, „[...] after I
started to live alone, I noticed, that I never purchase meat anymore, appearently my
organism doesn‘t require it – it is not somekind of attitude, but I do believe that people
gotta listen to their organism [...].
6.5.4.2. Sensory appeal
As underlined in theoretical findings, sensory appeal is one of the factors influencing food
choice. As a motivator to refuse meat, disgust usually performs as a determinant. Even
though there were no respondents naming bad taste of meat, they referred to the fact, that
meat is a corpse, and therefore it is disgusting to eat the dead animal “ [...]got rid of all
corpse in my fridge over a night and until now had no thoughts to try it again.“Another
respondent mentions „even though I don‘t call myself vegetarian, I stopped eating meat
about ten years ago, just because it is disgusting for me“.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 50 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
6.5.4.3. Reference group
The most consistent determinant among personal factors was reference group. It included
relatives, friends and even international celebrities, which respondents stated as their
motivators. However, the example of someone, who is already vegetarian, seemed to have
the biggest impact. “[...]I am very curious person, so I tried vegetarianism following the
example of one person who made a big impression on me..[...] came back to eating meat
until I met a women in work, who‘s whole family were vegans, so with her help and advices
I return to vegetarianism.“
Even though it might be expected that women tend to absorb the information and adapt
easily to the ones around them, there was male respondents who stated reference group as
primary motivator. One thanks his brother for the education „[...] After reading it
(information) and discussing with him (my brother), a lot of questions of meat
ethical/philosophical approach arose, and everything ended with unwillingness to eat
meat.“ Another respondent explains his motivation as following „[...] i met a vegetarian.
And it seemed such a normal thing [meatless eating] as it should be always“.
As it can be seen from the facts discussed in this chapter, respondents tend to follow an
example of people around them, and that again reflects theorithecal findings (e.g. Furst),
that reference group might work as a motivator to change or modify behavior, i.e. adopt
vegetarian diet.
6.5.4.4. Media influence
Some of respondents argued their reasons to adopt vegetarian diet were available
information in both books, or information which could be found on internet – both
scientific articles and facts which are broadcasted by the activists from environmental and
animal rights organizations such as PETA or GreenPeace. Surprisingly, some of the male
respondents discussed mass media as their main motivation to eliminate meat from their
dietary pattern. Even though previously skeptic, one respondent explains „main „job“ in
change of my perception of vegetarianism performed a book by Allen Car „Easyweigh to
Lose Weight“, which I read only from curiosity with no intents to lose weight; information
given on this (animal rights) website assured my decision“. Another male respondent
discuss „[...] I saw fair amount of videos about ethical behavior with animals and
humanism, and since I agreed with everything, it was easy to refuse meat [...]. Quite
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 51 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
unusual, but however media related motivation is explained by one more male respondent,
he says that he heard a song called „Don‘t eat your friends“ and that led to deeper thinking
about meat consumption and resulted by eliminating meat from eating pattern. Obviously,
information available on media has an impact to female respondents as well.
6.6. Means-end chain and laddering technique in empirical part
As mentioned above, with an aim to suplement the findings from content analysis, internetbased questionaire have been sent to respondents. Out of fifty respondents, 24 returned the
questionaire, and it is perceived as sufficient number to conduct the research. From all the
responses, two main motivations have been exluded: health and animal concern. However,
there were several motivations concerning environment and personal factors. The results of
the study are presented in the hierarchical value map below.
As it might be expected from the content analysis, in this part of the study respondents
mostly mentioned health as dominating factor, which lead to the consequence of better well
being, which influences values such as richer life, more career opportunities or valuable
time with the family. These findings are graphically reflected in the figure below:
Figure 12. Values concerning health
As it can be seen from consequences and values attached to health, people have clear
understanding why it is important to them to have vegetarian diet. They believe, that
eliminating meat from eating pattern helps them to live better life, which results in the
positive feelings about self or relationship with their families/social network. However,
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 52 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
despite the clear values or consequences about better well being, people also mentions
ability to work better, which might assure their welfare within the career context.
Figure 13. Values concentrated around animal concern
Even though in the first phase of the stdy responents stated animal concern as primary
factor to adopt and maintain vegetarian diet, the MEC method used in the analysis showed,
that people are not sure, how to argument there motivations if the reason to adopt
vegetarian diet is animal concern, therefore the value map is really vague and it is difficult
to interpret results.
The third main reason which clearly excluded from the results was personal factors, which,
of course, differed from each respondent, but was much more clearly argumented. These
answers are graphically reflected in the Figure 14 and discussed below.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 53 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Figure 14. : Values which arises from personal factors
People who decided to adopt vegetarian diet due to personal factors seemed to have better
understanding why they are doing so in comparison to the animal concern. As well as in the
values centred around health, people appreciate quality time with their children or family
values, as well as their own well-beings, such as self-realization or ability to find better job.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 54 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
7. Conclusions and limitations
As it was found from literature review, environmental conscious behavior is getting more
attention from mass media, and that has impact on individuals. Their willingness to change
their behavior, however, depends from many factors, but the tendency shows that these
factors are concern about health, environment, or self well- being. However, these factors
are inluenced by the environment and the culture the individual is in, and the way he or she
was brought up.
However, the motivation alone is not enough to change or maintain particular behavior,it
also depends on opportunity or abilities present. If individual has a wide choice of
vegetarian products or has enough money to afford them, he or she will more likely change
the behavior, and will maintain it after change have been done.
The empirical part of the study reflected theory in a way, and the factors discussed in the
literature review have been confirmed. The main factors to maintain vegetarian diet were
health, animal concern and personal factors. However, respondents had troubles
argumenting their choice for the animal concern, therefore the results were hard to
interpret. That highlighted the drawbacks of the way study have been conducted: it was
internet based research, eliminating the interviewer, and therefore limiting the ability to
know what respondents ment when answering questions.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 55 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
References:
Ajzen, I., (1988). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Milton Keynes: Open University
Press.
Bandura A. (1976) Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change Advances
in Behaviour Research and Therapy Vol. 1, p. 139-161
Batson, C. D. (1987). Prosocial motivation: Is it ever truly altruistic? Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology Vol 20, 65-122.
Beardsworth, A., Keil T. (1992) The vegetarian option: varieties, conversions, motives and
careers. Social. Review 40, 267–293;
Beardsworth, A., Keil T. (1993). Contemporary vegetarianism in the U.K.: Challenge and
Incorporation? Appetite, 20, 229–234;
Bilewicz M., Imhoff R., Drogosz M (2010). The humanity of what we eat: Conceptions of
human uniqueness among vegetarians and omnivores European Journal of Social
Psychology;
Brug J. (2008) Determinants of healthy eating: motivation, abilities and environmental
opportunities. Family Practice ; 25: i50–i55.
Couceiro P., Slywitch E., Lenz F. (2007) Eating pattern of vegetarian diet Einstein 6(3)
365-73;
Dwyer J. T. (1988). Health aspects of vegetarian diets. American Journal of Clinical
Nutrition, 48. 712-738
Elgin D. (1981). Voluntary Simplicity: Towards a Way of Life that is Outwardly Simple,
Inwardly Rich. Morrow: New York.
Ellen P.S., Wiener J.L., Cobb-Walgren C. (1991) The Role of Perceived Consumer
Effectiveness Journal of Public Policy & Marketing Vol. 10 (2) .102 -117
Follows, S. B., & Jobber, D. (2000). Environmentally responsible purchase behaviour: a
test of a consumer model. European Journal of Marketing, 34(5/6), 723–746.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 56 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Furst T., Connors M., Bisogni C.A., Sobal J., Falk L.W. (1996) Food Choice: A Conceptual
Model of the Process Appetite, 26, 247–266;
Greene-Finestone L.S., Campbell M.K., Evers S.E., Gutmanis I.A. (2008) Attitudes and
health behaviours of young adolescent omnivores and vegetarians: A school-based study.
Appetite 51 104 – 110
Gutman J. (1982) A means-end chain model based on consumer categorization processes,
Journal of Marketing 46 (1), 60-72.
Gutman J. (1997) Means–End Chains as Goal Hierarchies Psychology & Marketing Vol.
14(6):545–560;
Harker D., Sharma B., Harker M., Reinhard K. (2010) Leaving home: Food choice
behavior of young German adults. Journal of Business Research 63, 111–115
Hoogland, C.T., de Boer, J., & Boersema, J.J. (2005). Transparency of the meat chain in the
light of food culture and history. Appetite, 45, 15-23
Kalof L., Dietz T., Stern P.C., Guagnano G.A. (1999) Social Psychological and Structural
Influences on Vegetarian Beliefs Rural Sociology 64(3), pp. 500-511
Keane A., Willetts A., (1994) Factors that Affect Food Choice Nutrition & Food Science,
No. 4, July/August, 15-17;
Keegan S. (2009) Qualitative Research London : Kogan Page;
Krizmanic, J.. 1992. "Here's Who We Are ." Vegetarian Times 182 :72-76, 78-80
Kubberød E., Ueland Ø., Dingstad G.I., Risvik E., Henjesand I.E., (2008) The Effect of
Animality in the Consumption Experience—A Potential for Disgust. Journal of Food
Products Marketing, Volume 14, Issue 3, 103 – 124
Kummer C. (1991) What vegetarians don’t get The Atlantic 267, 6 , 106 – 112
Lanham-New S.A., Lee W.T.K., Torgerson D.J., Millward D.J. (2007) Is vegetable protein
more beneficial to bone than animal protein? International Congress Series 1297 310–318;
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 57 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Lee J.A., Holden S.J.S. (1999) Understanding the Determinants of Environmentally
Conscious Behavior Psychology & Marketing Vol. 16(5):373-392
Lin, C. & Fu, H. (2001). Exploring logic construction on MECs to enhance marketing
strategy. Marketing Intelligence & Planning. Vol. 19 (5), 362-367.
Maddux J.E., Rogers R.W. (1983) Protection Motivation and Self-Efficacy: A Revised
Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude ChangeJournal of Experimental Social Psychology
19, 469-479;
Makatouni A., (2002) What motivates consumers to buy organic food in the UK: results
from qualitative study. British Food Journal Vol.104 No 3/4/5, 345-352
Mariampolski H. (2001) Qualitative Market Research: a comprehensive guide. London:
Sage Publications;
McCullough, D. (1998), “Web-based market research: the dawning of a new age”, Direct
Marketing, Vol. 61 No. 8, 36-8.
Mooney K.M., Walbourn L. (2001) When college students reject food: not just a matter of
taste. Appetite 36, 41 – 50
Morris C., Kirwan J. (2006) Vegetarians: Uninvited, Uncomfortable or Special Guests at
the Table of the Alternative Food Economy? Sociologia Ruralis, Vol 46, Nr. 3 192 -213;
Nosek B.A., Banaji M.R., Greenwald A.G. (2002) E-Research: Ethics, Security, Design,
and Control in Psychological Research on the Internet Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 58,
No. 1, 161—176;
Ogden J., Karim L., Choudry A., Brown K. (2007) Understanding successful behaviour
change: the role of intentions, attitudes to the target and motivations and the example of
diet. Health education research Vol.22 no.3 397–405
Piggford T., Raciti M., Harker D., Harker M. (2008) Young adults’ food motives: an
Australian social marketing perspective Young Consumers Vol. 9 No. 1, 17-28;
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 58 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Pluhar E. B.(2010) Meat and Morality: Alternatives to Factory Farming Journal of
Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 23:455–468
Reser J.P., Bentrupperba¨umer J.M. (2005) What and where are environmental values?
Assessing the impacts of current diversity of use of ‘environmental’ and ‚World
Heritage’ values Journal of Environmental Psychology 25 125–146
Richter T., Veverka D. (1997). How many vegetarians are there? The Vegetarian Journal.
Rozin P. (1996). The socio-cultural context of eatingand food choice. In H. Meiselman, &
H. J. H. MacFie (Eds.), Food choice, acceptance and consumption London: Blackie
Russell, C. G., Busson, A., Flight, I., Bryan, J., van Lawick van Pabst, J. A & Cox, D.N.
(2004). A comparison of three laddering techniques applied to an example of a complex
food choice. Food Quality & Preference. Vol. 15, 569-583.
Santos M.L.S., Booth D.A. (1996) Influences on Meat Avoidance Among British Students
Appetite, 27, 197–205;
Schröder M. J.A., McEachern M. G.(2004) Consumer value conflicts surrounding ethical
food purchase decisions: a focus on animal welfare. International Journal of Consumer
Studies 28, 2 168–177;
Smart A. (2004) Adrift in the mainstream: Challenges facing the UK vegetarian movement.
British Food Journal, Vol. 106 Iss: 2, 79 – 92
Soron D., (2010) Sustainability, Self-Identity and the Sociology of Consumption.
Sustainable Development 18, 172–181
Stanton, J.M. (1998), “An empirical assessment of data collection using the internet”,
Personnel Psychology, Vol. 51 No. 3, 709-25.
Steptoe A., Pollard T.M., Wardle J. (1995) Development of a Measure of the Motives
Underlying the Selection of Food: the Food Choice Questionnaire Appetite 25, 267–284;
Sutton S. (1998) Predicting and explaining intentions and behaviour: how well are we
doing? Journal of Applied Social Psychology 28: 1317–38.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 59 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Thørgensen J. (1994) A model of recycling behaviour, from Danish source separation with
evidence programmes, International Journal of Research in Marketing 11 pp. 145-163
Twigg J. (1979) Food for thought: purity and vegetarianism Religion Volume 9, 13 – 35
Twigg J., (1983), Vegetarianism and the meanings of meat in Anne Murcott, ed., The
Sociology of Food and Eating: Essays on the Sociological Significance of Food, 18-30.
Wagner S. A.(2003) Understanding Green Consumer Behaviour: A qualitative cognitive
approach. New York: Routledge;
Webster, F. (1975) Determining the characteristics of socially conscious consumer. Journal
of Consumer Research, 2, 188–196.
Worsley A., Skrzypiec G. (1998). Teenage vegetarianism: prevalence, social and cognitive
contexts. Appetite 30, pp. 151 -170.;
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 60 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Appendix A
The extracts presented here, reflect literature review, and give an insight to the motivations
of individuals to adopt vegetarian diet. In the following section the term veg*ism refers to
both vegetarianism and veganism, it is widely spread among discussions in the internet.
Firstly, the specific forum devoted to animal rights was examined and the findings are
given below.
Member 1 (m) refers to the life transition as a tool to try something different „as a teenager
influenced by new, fresh Western ideas and the fact, that I love both people and animals, I
decided to stop eating meatballs. During diet practice I realised, that complete peaceful
euphoria came into my body, and it seemed as a sin to get back to using animal products“.
Member 2 (m) indicates a vegetarian friend as a motivator: „[...] i met a vegetarian. And it
seemed such a normal thing [meatless eating] as it should be always. Therefore, I could
say, that education works“.
Member 3 (f) claims, that the most and final influencing factor was religion „[...] strict
corpse refusal was dictated by Krishnaism, even though I still ate fish“.
Member 4 (m) gives more personal reason „when I decided to become a pilot, my sight was
a big problem. Therefore, a month before the physical examination I started to eat carrots
and drink their juice on daily basis, eat buckwheat porridge and the only animal-based
product butter. Since I experienced positive effects, I stayed on vegetarian diet until now“.
Member 5 (f) refers to the influence of celebrity as primary motivator „since childhood I
was the biggest fan of Bryan Addams, therefore I wanted to do everything he does, so i told
my mom since now I only eat snap-beans. However lack of information was the main
barrier, so I went back to eating fish and poultry occasionally. The biggest inspiration to
stay away from meat now is more disgust for meat than the regret for animals“.
Member 6 (m) considers „i‘m fresh vegetarian. I don‘t know, which was the main [factor]
to help me decide: experience, brain, emotions or references. I was one [vegetarian] in
heart for a long, or maybe all time. I envied once, who could be, but once I tried, i saw it is
much easier than I thought“.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 61 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Member 7 (f) shares the memory of childhood „in a farm I saw my grand-parent sticking
pig and was ready to take a knife and kill him instead, after a while I got a book „How to
live healthy for 150 years“ and since there were supportive ideas about vegetarianism, next
time I saw meat, I was not able to swallow it. That’s how I began my vegetarian career“.
Member 8 (m) states „i disliked meat from the childhood, but to make final decision
Western mass comunication helped. They informed me about the growth rate of
vegetarians, I saw fair amount of videos about ethical behavior with animals and
humanism, and since I agreed with everything, it was easy to refuse meat“.
Member 9 (m) says, that despite his previous sceptic view to vegetarianism, main source of
his decision was available information: „main „job“ in change of my perception of
vegetarianism performed a book by Allen Car „Easyweigh to Lose Weight“, which I read
only from curiosity with no intents to lose weight; information given on this website
assured my decision“.
Member 10 (f) shares her experience „my organism refuses eggs, diary products, and I
have no cravings whatsoever – something raises from inside, so I just choose listen to my
organism even though against my will“.
Member 11 (f) experienced a close contact with animals and therefore association that meat
comes from living creatures „i stopped eating animals probably because my dad is a
hunter, so I saw enough of gutted recently-alive animals“.
Member 12 (f) tells the following story „i became vegetarian when I got to knew, how
animals are raised for food. I imagined, that they live in a big greenland, and are killed
with the newest painless technologies – understanding came after I saw video clips from
PETA, and realised what is really going on in farms. From that moment meat became
disgusting to me“.
Member 13 (m) started his vegetarian „career“ after he quit smoking „after I quit, i feel
amazing, since I quit one poison, I don‘t want stuff myself with inappropriate food
anymore, and I found out that there are delicious vegan food out there, so I don‘t want to
stop living healthy“.
Member 14 (f) says, that awareness for animals emerged from her interests to ecology and
fauna „i lived near naturalist center, I attended several after school activities, all related
with animal, but to go deeper into animal rights I started about several years ago, and the
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 62 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
inspiration for that was music – lyrics inspired to look deeper to meat industry and refused
to eat meat“.
Another member (m) complement this saying, naming concrete song „Ceburaska – Don‘t
eat your friends“. He claims, that this song stimulated him to think and stop eating meat, at
the same time, belonging to a subculture worked as another factor because „i am a straightedger and don‘t see the point poisoning my organism“.
Member 16 (f) search of information brought her to the access of information „ [....] started
to search information how to lose weight, typing „healthy eating“ into search engine, until
I met webpages similar to this one. My eyes were open overnight and I got rid of all corpse
in my fridge over a night and until now had no thoughts to try it again“.
Member 17 (f) gives reference groups as an example „I am very curious person, so I tried
vegetarianism following the example of one person who made a big impression on me.
However due to unballanced eating pattern I got sick with anemia, and came back to eating
meat until I met a women in work, who‘s whole family were vegans, so with her help and
advices I return to vegetarianism“.
Member 18 (f) emphasizes ecological concern „I became vegetarian for the nature, not for
the animals, even though these things are closely related. My friends lectured me how
production of meat (especially beef) is damaging nature. I entered Greenpeace when I
emigrated, so I decided to take actions and ‘save a world’. “
Member 19 (m) was encouraged by information availability „accidentally I saw a narrow
topic in one of discussion boards – it was short, and stimulated some thoughts in this area
[vegetarianism concept], followed by the more serious article in the journal, which made
me think even more, and over night I realised that is time to change my dietary pattern“. He
also states the reasons to maintain vegetarian diet „after meat elimination I noticed, that I
feel better, it became easier to think, better health – I almost forgot what it means to have
flu or cold, and learning skills increased – it became easier to remmember stuff“.
Member 20 (f) got educated about animals becoming meat during her education process
„after class trips to „Nematekas“, „Biovela“, „Utenos mesa“ [names of meat producers in
Lithuania], that piece of meat I had for breakfast was the last one. To see all procedures of
slaughtering and the eyes of cattle waiting for his turn was too much. Then I thought if I
don‘t kill my dog, how could I kill others?“
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 63 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Member 21 (m) reflects to self-education „various movies, articles, interests in food as a
whole – it is actual, because I am sportsman, also it was inspired by ecology – I had
interests in that for a very long time, and veg*ism is very closely related with that“.
Member 22 (f) says that vegetarianism came naturally to her life „I became
vegetarian/vegan very simple – just because. That‘s the philosophy I follow all my life, just
because I can. I made the decision to make my life more interesting.“
Member 23 (f) names more than one reason „firstly, when I moved to Great Britain, I met a
lot of wonderfull people studying environment protection, they are activists and they
educated me about the meat and other animal based production damage for environment.
In the other words, it takes a lot of resources to produce meat in comparison with plantbased food. As the secondary motive it was animal-rights of course, that understanding
came after I started to search information about animal treatment, and thirdly is my own
beliefs, that meat is unhealthy.
Member 24 (m) says „just because I can‘t otherwise. Materialization of animals,
exploitation and killing due to satisfying our needs seems at the very least amoral“.
Member 25 (f) discusses “it is a gradual process, I actually don’t know when I stopped
eating meat. The most impact on that had my peers’ personal example. I explain my
vegetarianism so: since I wouldn’t be able to kill an animal by my hands, I can’t eat one”.
Member 26 (f) argues „if I can‘t watch how an animal is slaughtered for food, I can‘t eat it
either – I can‘t delete the way from a cattle to the meatball, instead of minced meat I see
minced animal“.
Member 27 (m) refers „the biggest influence was made by my brother – not only by giving
information, but also being a live example. After reading it and discussing with him, a lot of
questions of meat ethical/philosopical approach arose, and everything ended with
unwillingness to eat meat“.
Second step of the study was to examine motivations in second forum in Lithuania. Since
the majority of members in this forum are females, the gender will be given only if a
response is from male, even though it is less likely case.
Member 1 claim the automatic organism refusal of meat „my stomach stopped digesting it.
If i eat meat, I can feel it as a stone in my stomach all day, had to take medicine everyday“
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 64 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Member 2 names following reasons „I refused eating meat for ideological and health
reasons, despite the fact, that I like meals made from meat. However, the cravings for meat
is reducing gradually with time“.
Member 3 says „I don‘t eat meat. How can I eat corpse? [...] I perceive vegetarianism as a
moral and health approach“.
Member 4 discusses „I think, that there are enough food on this planet so we don‘t need to
eat animals, this thought is reinforced when I start considering, what that poor creature
feels going to death, or if I see ones‘ eyes, it becomes clear it is not right to eat them“.
Member 5 mentions her accidental encounter with vegetarianism „I decided to make
candies, and took my mom‘s vegetarian cook book. I read the preface about vegetarianism
and its‘ benefits to our health, and started to think that it might be true, therefore I started
to browse for more information on the internet about animal industry, vegetarianism,
animal rights, etc., and finally decided to become one“.
Member 6 looks at vegetarianism as an unconsciously understandable thing „vegetarianism
is not about not eating meat, is about not eating animals. Vegetarianism for me is nothing
else as a lifestyle, my husband will have to be vegetarian too. I don‘t think I am insane – I
don‘t wear fur, leather, I don‘t buy cosmetics tested on animals – therefore I do no harm to
animals“.
Member 7 gives following arguments for vegetarianism „my motives are very concrete, not
all of them are discovered by me personally: firstly, meat doesn‘t fit me by the blood type,
vegetarianism fits me – that is supported by the way i feel, from meat my organism becomes
heavy, it is digested hardly and polutes my stomach for few days. Secondly, I was positively
influenced by Allen Carr book, which moved me more towards vegetarianism and gave
proper information about human‘s digestive system and food“.
Member 8 says „I am vegetarian because I believe, that human‘s digestive system is not
fitted to digest animal-base products and these make more damage than benefits“
Member 9 claims, that transofrmation came after she started to raise a pet herself „I got
insanely cute degu rodent and everything turned upside-down. I never had pets before, but
then there is such a cute creature next to me, to take a piece of meat seems unhuman and
disgusting.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 65 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Member 10 „today I made final decision to become vegetarian – not to be trendy, or for
health reasons, I just love animals too much and shocking clips in TV and internet put all
dots on ‚i’.
Member 11 discusses „my primary motive was the heavy feeling in the stomach, and other
digestive problems became unbearable, that brought me to finding the reasons for that and
I came up to articles about rotting processes of meat in the stomach, that was about enough
to stop eating meat“.
Member 12 claims, that the decision came gradually, she says „i was thinking about
vegetarianism for a long time, last summer I realised that I have no cravings for meat
whatsover, and finally I came to decision after I read a book (Eating animals) and saw a
movie (Food Inc.) about the processes in meat production.“
Member 13 „my decision to eliminate meat from my dietary pattern was not influenced by
any external factors, I simply realised, that it is not tasty anymore and I feel nauseaus,
therefore I decided not to torture myself anymore“.
Member 14 names more than one reason to stop eating meat “I was never fan of meat, well,
despite several favourite meals. Secondly, I am able to refuse meat for the animals’ sake,
and thirdly, educational information about human’s body and the fact that meat is not as
healthy as it has been perceived”.
Member 15 also names negative effects on organism after she ate meat „i am vegetarian for
health reasons, the consequences of meat eating can be felt following day – I am forced to
suffer from unbearable migraine“.
Member 16 also refers to direct contact with raising animals – „I know it might sound
funny, but I spent all summers at my grandparents, [...] pigs have such a beutiful eyes, I
never ate animals which I saw alive, later there were vegetarians among my friends, so
that‘s how it started.“
Member 17 distinguishes life transition „after I started to live alone, I noticed, that I never
purchase meat anymore, appearently my organism doesn‘t require it – it is not somekind of
attitude, but I do believe that people gotta listen to their organism“.
Member 18 refers to her strong beliefs „I am vegetarian who is about to be vegan, but
sometimes I do ‚small crimes‘ I became one [vegetarian] due to a strong will NOT to
support cruel husbandry industry“.
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 66 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Member 19 as well refers to life transition as a primary motive to eliminate meat „I stopped
when I became pregnant, to get sure about my choice a movie called „Earthlings“ helped,
now I don‘t want animals to be killed for my unneccessary needs“.
Member 20 names one main reason, which is not that common „my vegetarianism started
because of psyhological disease, which, by the way, helped me to cure, as well it was
related to the fact that I started practicing yoga“. She also mentions reasons, which helps
her to maintain vegetarian diet „now when I think why I don‘t eat meat, I think, that
together with meat you eat animal‘s experienced pain, fear, emotions when he was killed“.
Member 21 says, that everything started from her interests to healthy eating „that for me
has associations with heathy eating, from the change of point of view, small changes into
eating habits turned into vegetarianism“.
Member 22 discusses „it all came after I found an article, claiming that vegetarians have
better well-being, and well, what can I say – it is true“.
Member 23 refers to long practice of semi-vegetarianism „I have no regrets whatsover for
animals, they eat each other anyway, I simply dislike meat, and can‘t stand the fact that I
eat some corpse, moreover, I don‘t want to polute my organism and nerve system with a
fear from dying creature“.
Member 24, who is vegan, says, „it never seemed natural for me to eat animals, human
after all is made from the same meat, that is just canibalizm, the same is with milk
products, if cow‘s milk is for cattles, why then it is in shops? Why there are no women‘s
milk?, and as a conclusion she says „I think, therefore I‘m vegan“.
Member 25, says „even though I don‘t call myself vegetarian, I stopped eating meat about
ten years ago, just because it is disgusting for me, so I decided to stop torturing myself and
don‘t eat it until I don‘t want it.“
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 67 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
Appendix B
Appendix B
Hello,
I am a student in Aarhus School of Business. For my final project I‘m conducting a study
exploring vegetarian motivations and I would be glad if you could spend some time to
answer questions given in this survey.
Please answer the questions. Your data will remain strictly anonymous and will only be
used for the purpose of this research.
Your age:
Your gender:
Your education:
Which kind of vegetarian are you?:
How long have you maintained vegetarian diet?:
Now I want to ask you to describe your personal reasons to choose vegetarian food. Please
write below the main reasons why you choose vegetarian food. It is up to you how many
reasons you want to give, but it can‘t be more than three. If you have more than three
reasons for choosing vegetarian food, then mention the three most important reasons.
1.
1.1. 1st reason why I choose vegetarian food:
1.2. 2nd reason why I choose vegetarian food:
1.3. 3rd reason why I choose vegetarian food:
2. I would also like to know, why each of the reasons mentioned above are important to
you. And again why each of the reasons you mention in this step are important to you?
Again, how many reasons you give it is up to you, but not more than three. If you named
less than three reasons above, just leave the following blanks empty.
2.1. Why is 1.1. important to you?:
And why is this important to you?
2.1.1...........................................................2.1.1.a) .............................................
2.1.2..........................................................2.1.2.a)...............................................
Milda Dragunaite
Master Thesis, 2011
Page 68 of 69
Aarhus School of Business
2.1.3..........................................................2.1.3.a)...............................................
2.2. Why is 1.2. important to you?
Why is that important to you?
2.2.1...........................................................2.2.1.a) .............................................
2.2.2..........................................................2.2.2.a)...............................................
2.2.3..........................................................2.2.3.a)...............................................
2.3. Why is 1.3 important to you?
Why is that important to you?
2.3.1...........................................................2.3.1.a) .............................................
2.3.2..........................................................2.3.2.a)...............................................
2.3.3..........................................................2.3.3.a)...............................................
Thank you for your time! I appreciate your cooperation.