The suppression of moral engagement in consumer responses to animal slaughter

Despite growing research on meat-animal reminders, the psychological impact of slaughter exposure on consumers remains underexplored. In this preregistered experiment, we examined whether exposing consumers to animal slaughter increases their willingness to substitute meat by activating a moral engagement process involving perceived harm, prevention beliefs, and personal norms. A sample of 392 UK meat-eating participants were recruited and randomly assigned to view one of four images: an image of animal slaughter (i.e., chicken or pig) or a control image (i.e., chicken or pork meat prepared for consumption). Mediation analyses revealed that slaughter exposure did not directly affect willingness to substitute meat but had an indirect effect through the moral engagement process, activated through increased perceived harm, prevention beliefs, and personal norms. This indirect effect was stronger upon exposure to pig slaughter than to chicken slaughter. Higher meat consumption and especially higher meat attachment suppressed the moral engagement process, reducing the impact of animal slaughter on willingness to substitute meat. In both slaughter conditions, indirect effects were stronger when personal norms were bypassed, suggesting that perceived harm and prevention beliefs alone can shift meat-eating intentions. While subject to methodological limitations, our study informs the design of interventions to promote moral engagement towards animals and encourage meat substitution and highlights the importance of strengthening prevention beliefs and addressing meat attachment. • Exposure to animal slaughter indirectly increased willingness to substitute meat via moral engagement. • Moral engagement was driven by perceived harm, prevention beliefs, and personal norms. • Pig slaughter condition elicited stronger moral engagement compared to the chicken slaughter condition. • High meat consumption and meat attachment suppressed moral engagement and meat substitution intentions. • Strengthening prevention beliefs and addressing meat attachment may enhance meat substitution efforts.