ORIGINAL

Abstract

This thesis explores how messages outlining beef’s environmental toll can best be designed to discourage consumers from buying beef. Specifically, this experiment investigates 1) whether gain or loss frames are more discouraging, 2) which of seven environmental concepts are most discouraging, and 3) which sociodemographic characteristics are predictors of consumers’ discouragement. The goal of this research is to investigate the efficacy of environmental messages as a means of promoting wide-scale dietary shifts away from red meat, ultimately to help reduce the negative environmental effects of livestock. To do so, this research first contextualizes the messaging experiment from an environmental and human health standpoint, and then from a behavioral science standpoint. For the experiment itself, a convenience sample (n=1,086) was recruited and randomized to view seven messages about a different aspect of beef’s environmental toll framed either positively or negatively. No significant difference was found between the discouragement scores for either the gain or loss-framed messages, nor between the seven messages. The findings suggest that younger, more educated, affluent, non-heterosexual, Latinx participants that ate beef less frequently were more likely to find the messages discouraging. I conclude that different segments of the population react differently to environmental information, and as such, that more research is needed to explore why this is so and how efforts aimed at reducing meat consumption can best take advantage of these factors so that they appropriately target different consumers in order to best discourage red meat consumption. Furthermore, I suggest that future research should investigate the role of different framing effects and other messaging strategies, such as highlighting specific environmental concepts, on discouraging red meat consumption.