ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
You Are What You Eat and So Is Our Planet: Identifying Dietary Groups Based on Personality and Environmentalism.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rye (Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Behavioral change interventions promoting the reduction of animal product consumption are valuable tools to improve ecological sustainability as well as public health and help the mitigation of climate change. Recent findings revealed improved efficacy of interventions targeted at barriers (e.g., self-efficacy) of three different types of meat consumers over non-targeted interventions (e.g., completion of unrelated surveys). However, such interventions have yet to factor in the role of individual differences in personality. Therefore, in a first step, we performed segmentation analysis on barriers and benefits of reducing animal product consumption (e.g., meat attachment, environmentalism) with the inclusion of personality. In an online sample of N=1135 participants, latent profile analysis revealed five distinct dietary groups: "plant-based eaters", "meat-reducers", "medium-hindrance meat eaters", "medium strong-hindrance meat eaters, and "strong-hindrance meat eaters", based on inhibitors and facilitators of meat reduction. Groups differed in terms of consumption of different animal products (η2=0.08 to η2=0.80) as well as the Big Five (η2=0.08 to η2=0.80) and Dark Triad (η2=0.08 to η2=0.80). Strong-hindrance meat eaters were characterized by low Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, and Openness as well as high dark trait expression, implying new targets for future intervention design.
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.