Meat reducers (those who reduce Meath consumption) are less satisfied with their diet than true vegetarians, maybe because of the more effort applied, the more rewarded they feel

Asher, Kathryn, and Paul Peters. 2019. “Go the Whole Nine Yards? How Extent of Meat Restriction Impacts Individual Dietary Experience.” SocArXiv. September 13. doi:10.31235/osf.io/ycbd2

Abstract: There are a variety of approaches to addressing meat overconsumption including forms of meat restriction that vary by the degree of reductions and the type of meat reduced. This study examines three such diets—a vegetarian diet, a reduced-meat diet, and a chicken-free diet—with a focus on the differences in the lived dietary experiences of their adherents. These lived experiences are operationalized using a variety of measures: satisfaction with food-related life, social ties, convenience, social/personal life, health, cost, motivation, identity, perception of prevalence rates, length of diet adherence, and the theory of planned behavior (intentions, attitudes, perceived behavioral control, and subjective norms). The data comes from an online survey of a cross-sectional, census-balanced sample of more than 30,0000 U.S. residents aged 18+ years sourced from Nielsen’s Harris Panel. The results showed meat reducers to be a larger group than previously suspected, with a third of American adults self-identifying as reducing their meat consumption, compared to one percent each who identify as a vegetarian or chicken avoider. The findings also demonstrated that a vegetarian diet had the strongest lived dietary experiences among American adults who are currently eating one of the meat-restricted diets. This research speaks to how the degree and type of meat restriction can impact an individual’s lived experience with their diet.