Social Influence and Meat-Eating Behaviour

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I especially appreciate this work and congratulate the authors for this extremely complex and interesting study. To make the paper even more useful and interesting, some ideas, data, arguments should be added.

The authors suggest the consequences of high meat consumption, both on human health and on the environment. Although I understand the caution of the authors, in my opinion, a more thorough argumentation of these statements should be made. I propose some landmarks in this regard:

-        The link between global climate change, ruminants and methane (very important greenhouse gas). I suggest here to populate with numbers and percentages, globally, regionally, nationally.

-        The dynamics of the growth of degenerative diseases in developed countries in relation to meat consumption. Here, too, I suggest to populate with figures and percentages, at a global, regional, national level, especially from the statistics of the international bodies.

In any scientific paper, the DISCUSSIONS section must report its own results to those published in other papers or documents. References to other scientific findings are completely missing in this paper, which is inadmissible. That is why it is necessary to substantially improve the work in the DISCUSSIONS chapter.

Author Response

Thank you for the constructive feedback. We address the individual comments and suggestions below.

I especially appreciate this work and congratulate the authors for this extremely complex and interesting study. To make the paper even more useful and interesting, some ideas, data, arguments should be added.

The authors suggest the consequences of high meat consumption, both on human health and on the environment. Although I understand the caution of the authors, in my opinion, a more thorough argumentation of these statements should be made. I propose some landmarks in this regard:

-        The link between global climate change, ruminants and methane (very important greenhouse gas). I suggest here to populate with numbers and percentages, globally, regionally, nationally.

We have included statistics on GHG emission from meat production on page 1 (last paragraph). 

-        The dynamics of the growth of degenerative diseases in developed countries in relation to meat consumption. Here, too, I suggest to populate with figures and percentages, at a global, regional, national level, especially from the statistics of the international bodies.

We have included links between meat consumption and degenerative diseases and other health risks on page 2 (first paragraph). 

In any scientific paper, the DISCUSSIONS section must report its own results to those published in other papers or documents. References to other scientific findings are completely missing in this paper, which is inadmissible. That is why it is necessary to substantially improve the work in the DISCUSSIONS chapter

We have revised the discussion section to better connect it to relevant studies and position it in the existing literature (starting pg 19).

Reviewer 2 Report

Good paper, it could be printed. Some remarks are bellow.

Comment on: Einhorn, Laura (2020) : Normative social influence on meat consumption, MPIfG Discussion Paper, No. 20/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, Cologne, https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0005-C748-A

In a real-world setting and based on the combination of a field and a survey experiment in seven German university dining halls, the Author analyzed the impact of social norms on meat consumption in a single meal choice situation. She distinguished between descriptive and injunctive norms as well as between remote and direct norms. In a first step, descriptive and injunctive remote norm message interventions promoting a vegetarian diet were implemented. In a second step, the influence of direct social norms, i.e., the influence of vegetarian peers on non-vegetarians’ meal choice, was assessed. The Author found that neither type of remote eating norm influences food choice, while direct normative influence leads to convergence towards vegetarian meal choices in a university setting.

Comment in your paper Introduction on:  Gossard, M. H., & York, R. (2003). Social Structural Influences on Meat Consumption. Human Ecology Review, 10(1), 1–9. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24707082

Gender, race, ethnicity, location of residence (region and urban vs. non-urban), and social class all appear to affect dietary habits even when controlling for physiological variables such as body weight and age. The Authors argue that social structural factors in combination with macro-economic structure and psychological factors provide a rich explanation of the consumption patterns of individuals.

Author Response

Thank you for the constructive feedback. We address the individual comments and suggestions below.

Good paper, it could be printed. Some remarks are bellow.

Comment on: Einhorn, Laura (2020) : Normative social influence on meat consumption, MPIfG Discussion Paper, No. 20/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, Cologne, https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0005-C748-A

In a real-world setting and based on the combination of a field and a survey experiment in seven German university dining halls, the Author analyzed the impact of social norms on meat consumption in a single meal choice situation. She distinguished between descriptive and injunctive norms as well as between remote and direct norms. In a first step, descriptive and injunctive remote norm message interventions promoting a vegetarian diet were implemented. In a second step, the influence of direct social norms, i.e., the influence of vegetarian peers on non-vegetarians’ meal choice, was assessed. The Author found that neither type of remote eating norm influences food choice, while direct normative influence leads to convergence towards vegetarian meal choices in a university setting.

Thank you for the comment. We have included the paper and the discussion in text.

Comment in your paper Introduction on:  Gossard, M. H., & York, R. (2003). Social Structural Influences on Meat Consumption. Human Ecology Review, 10(1), 1–9. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24707082

Gender, race, ethnicity, location of residence (region and urban vs. non-urban), and social class all appear to affect dietary habits even when controlling for physiological variables such as body weight and age. The Authors argue that social structural factors in combination with macro-economic structure and psychological factors provide a rich explanation of the consumption patterns of individuals.

Thank you for the comment. We have included the paper and the discussion in text.