Do-Gooder Derogation

Abstract

Two studies document do-gooder derogation (the putting down of morally motivated others), by studying the reactions of meat eaters to vegetarians. In Study 1, 47% of participants freely associated negative terms with vegetarians and the valence of the words was negatively related to how much participants expected vegetarians to see themselves as morally superior to nonvegetarians. In Study 2, we manipulated the salience of anticipated moral reproach by varying whether participants reported these expectations before or after rating vegetarians. As predicted, participants rated vegetarians less positively after imagining their moral judgment of meat eaters. These studies empirically document the backlash reported by moral minorities and trace it back to resentment by the mainstream against feeling morally judged.

A dual‐process motivational model of attitudes towards vegetarians and vegans

“…The aim of the current research was to apply a theoretical model of the motivational basis of intergroup attitudes to a more novel research target: individuals described in terms of their dietary practices and identification. This investigation also contributes to other recent attempts to understand the basis of attitudes towards vegetarians and vegans (e.g., Chin, Fisak, & Sims, 2002;MacInnis & Hodson, 2017;Minson & Monin, 2012;Ruby, 2012;Ruby & Heine, 2011;Ruby et al, 2016) and the associations between right-wing ideologies and higher levels of meat consumption (e.g., Allen & Baines, 2002;Allen, Wilson, Ng, & Dunne, 2000;Dhont & Hodson, 2014).…”

“…Although veg*anism may be viewed as a virtuous behavior, there is also growing evidence of a negative bias towards veg*ans (e.g., MacInnis & Hodson, 2017;Minson & Monin, 2012). In one study, 47% of the participants freely associated at least one negative word with vegetarians (Minson & Monin, 2012).…”

“…Although veg*anism may be viewed as a virtuous behavior, there is also growing evidence of a negative bias towards veg*ans (e.g., MacInnis & Hodson, 2017;Minson & Monin, 2012). In one study, 47% of the participants freely associated at least one negative word with vegetarians (Minson & Monin, 2012). From the perspectives of veg*ans themselves, some individuals (particularly vegans) have reported experiencing decreased contact from friends, stigma, and even discrimination since adopting veg*anism (Hirschler, 2011;MacInnis & Hodson, 2017;Potts & White, 2007, 2008.…”

Taking Close Others’ Environmental Behavior Into Account When Striking the Moral Balance? Evidence for Vicarious Licensing, Not for Vicarious Cleansing

“…Another explanation for the absence of vicarious cleansing could be that within the imagined scenarios, people may have felt that it would have been socially awkward to be seen to be "picking up" after others (i.e., compensating for the morally questionable behavior of a close friend or family member). In addition, Minson and Monin (2011) more recently suggested that overly moral behavior is often frowned upon, which may create an additional hurdle for such vicarious cleansing behavior. Furthermore, it could be that participants were less worried about appearing environmentally unfriendly because of the less environmentally friendly behavior of the other person.…”

Personality Profiles, Values and Empathy: Differences between Lacto-Ovo-Vegetarians and Vegans

“…For example, omnivores often feel morally judged by vegetarians for their way of eating [78]. However, it is still unclear whether vegan eating habits predispose for ethical and moral concerns towards ‘less strict' forms of vegetarian nutrition (e.g., lacto-ovo-vegetarians), thereby possibly shifting the above-mentioned tendency to vegetarian subgroups.…”