What determines omnivores' meat consumption and their willingness to reduce the amount of meat they eat?

This article investigates the relationship between "meat attachment"—a multidimensional affective connection to meat—and the "4Ns" (the four defense arguments omnivores use to justify meat consumption: meat is normal, necessary, nice, and natural) among Belgian omnivores. The study finds that both constructs are positively correlated, but meat attachment better predicts actual meat consumption and willingness to reduce it, with the "dependence" dimension being particularly influential. Additionally, ethical concerns about animal welfare significantly affect meat consumption and reduction willingness, whereas health and environmental beliefs do not show a significant impact. Gender also plays a role, with women consuming less meat and showing greater willingness to reduce consumption. The findings suggest that campaigns focusing on ethical issues and providing meat alternatives may be more effective than those emphasizing health risks.