Rolf Degen summarizing... People tend to belittle the extent of their meat consumption to mitigate the cognitive dissonance triggered by the meat paradox

Meat‐related cognitive dissonance: The social psychology of eating animals. Hank Rothgerber  Daniel L. Rosenfeld. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, April 7 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12592

Rolf Degen's take: https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/1380174005051740172

Abstract: As the practice of eating animals as meat faces increased scrutiny for its ethical, health, and environmental implications, a subfield devoted to its psychology has begun to flourish. Researchers have been especially interested in understanding how individuals morally care for animals and wish them no harm yet simultaneously eat them as food. Merging theories of cognitive dissonance, moral disengagement, and neutralization, the current review aims to provide a framework of meat‐related cognitive dissonance (MRCD) that explains this belief–behavior inconsistency. First, we evaluate the existing research on mechanisms that (a) prevent MRCD from occurring and (b) reduce MRCD once it has occurred. Second, we highlight promising avenues for further research on MRCD. The purpose of this review, ultimately, is to synthesize findings from this emerging area of research and to highlight its exciting future directions for the field of social psychology.