ArticleFrontiers in psychology2020
Two Sides of the Same Coin: Environmental and Health Concern Pathways Toward Meat Consumption.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of the Italian version of the Eating-Related Eco-Concern Questionnaire: insights into its relationship with orthorexia nervosa.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Modelling the mass consumption potential of organic food: Evidence from an emerging economy.PloS one · 2023Article
- The Effect of Novel and Environmentally Friendly Foods on Consumer Attitude and Behavior: A Value-Attitude-Behavioral Model.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Lowering Red Meat and Processed Meat Consumption With Environmental, Animal Welfare, and Health Arguments in Italy: An Online Experiment.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Comparing meat abstainers with avid meat eaters and committed meat reducers.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The dramatic increase of meat production in the last decades has proven to be one of the most impacting causes of negative environmental outcomes (e.g., increase of greenhouse emissions, pollution of land and water, and biodiversity loss). In two studies, we aimed to verify the role of key socio-psychological dimensions on meat intake. Study 1 (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.