ArticleAppetite2022
Where we work determines what we eat: A qualitative exploration of the multi-dimensional influences on meat consumption when home and office working during the Covid 19 lockdown in London, UK.
Article in Appetite, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Meat consumption among different social groups and specific options for reducing it: a literature review of empirical research.Frontiers in sociology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Food choices, including the decision to consume meat, are complex and determined by many inter-related influences. This study examined the choice of working professionals to consume meat in the context of forced changes in working conditions during lockdowns in London during the Covid 19 outbreak in 2020-21. Guided by an adapted Ecological Framework depicting influences on food choice in this context, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 33 employees of a financial services consultancy who normally work from offices in central London but were homeworking at the time of research. Food choices associated with all meals (but especially lunches) when working in each setting were explored. Four key themes emerged from the research. Firstly, when office-working the influence of colleagues (social environment factor) on the choice to consume meat was variable and individual-level factors, particularly personality traits, impacted the extent of social influence. Secondly, limited availability of non-meat options and preferences for buying meat-based meals outside the home (physical environment factor), contributed to more meat consumption when office-working. Thirdly, alignment of food choices between household members (social environment factor), largely for convenience reasons, resulted in a greater likelihood of non-meat meals being eaten when homeworking. Finally, not having to commute (physical environment factor) meant participants had more time available, resulting in changes to routines and priorities (individual-level factors), with some reduced meat consumption. Overall, research findings contribute to building understanding of how both home and office-working influence the choice to consume meat. Findings may be used to inform strategies to reduce meat consumption, which will in turn play a role in supporting global climate change targets and reducing harm to the natural environment associated with food choices.
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.