People primarily justify eating meat using one of four rationalizations: they believe it is natural, necessary, normal, and/or nice; each of these is associated with a specific psychological profile

Psychological profiles of people who justify eating meat as natural, necessary, normal, or nice. Christopher J. Hopwood, Wiebke Bleidorn. Food Quality and Preference, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.02.004

Highlights
•    People primarily justify eating meat using one of four rationalizations: they believe it is natural, necessary, normal, and/or nice.
•    Each of these rationalizations is associated with a specific psychological profile of personality traits and values.
•    These profiles provide information about individual differences in food choice and may be used to promote behavior change.

Abstract: Research suggests that people tend to use one of four rationalizations to justify eating meat despite its empirically established negative consequences for both personal and societal well-being: the beliefs that meat is natural, necessary, normal, or nice. The goal of this study was to better understand what kind of people would tend to use these different rationalizations in terms of their personality traits, values, and motivations for plant-based eating. Results suggest specific psychological profiles for each of the four meat-eating rationalizations. These profiles may be useful for behavior change advocacy and for furthering the basic science of individual differences underlying food preferences and choices. Suggestions for future research that builds upon these initial findings are highlighted.

Check also Eating meat does not make you mean: Why vegetarians don't have the moral high ground. Rolf Degen, 2014  https://plus.google.com/101046916407340625977/posts/gaNZUm9rGW5