Participants were individuals who identified as vegan and were at least 18 years old. In total, 100 (90 female, 8 male, 2 non-binary) participants between 18 and 69 years completed an online questionnaire (M = 36.45; SD = 12.17). Effective sample size for the quantitative part of the questionnaire was 91 because one participant stated they were not vegan and was excluded from the analysis and eight participants did not complete this part. Full demographic data can be found in Table 1. Recruitment took place through social media, vegan forums, and online communities related to plant-based living (e.g. social media of the research group / University, Facebook groups). Participation was entirely voluntary and anonymous. No compensation was provided. All procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines. According to ethical requirements in Austria, this research was deemed exempt from ethical approval, as all data was anonymous, and no clinical data was assessed. The study was not preregistered. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. The anonymised dataset and survey materials are publicly available on the Open Science Framework (OSF, see Mittmann et al., 2025).

Data were collected via an anonymous online questionnaire created with SoSci Survey. Before beginning the questionnaire, participants were presented with an informed consent statement outlining the study’s purpose, confidentiality, and data protection in accordance with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Participants confirmed their voluntary consent by proceeding to the survey. The questionnaire took approximately 15–20 minutes to complete.

The questionnaire consisted of both closed- and open-ended questions designed to explore the social and psychological experiences after adopting a vegan lifestyle. Open-ended items invited participants to reflect on how becoming vegan affected their relationships, worldview, and emotional well-being. All questions can be found in Table 2 in the order they were presented. Additionally, a semantic differential scale with 23 adjective pairs assessed how participants characterised their lives since becoming vegan (e.g., active–passive, meaningful–meaningless, sustainable–short-term). The adjective pairs were assigned a priori to two conceptual categories reflecting the focus of evaluation: individual experience of veganism (8 pairs, e.g., meaningful–meaningless, healthy–unhealthy) and perceived societal characterisations of veganism (15 pairs, e.g., modern–traditional, alternative–conventional). Demographic information collected included age, gender, education level, country of residence, urban or rural living environment, and personal experience with agriculture (e.g., growing up on a farm, studying or working in agricultural contexts).

Participants most frequently described positive effects of veganism on their mental well-being, particularly in terms of increased psychological coherence and emotional relief. Many accounts emphasised that living in accordance with personal moral values reduced feelings of guilt and responsibility for animal suffering and fostered a sense of inner calm, clarity, and self-consistency. These positive experiences were more numerous across the dataset and often framed as a stabilising aspect of participants’ well-being. At the same time, a smaller but salient set of accounts highlighted the emotional burden associated with heightened awareness of animal suffering and systemic injustice. Participants described feelings of sadness, frustration, and helplessness arising from their ongoing exposure to information about animal exploitation and from the perception that individual action has limited impact within a predominantly non-vegan society. Negative experiences were also linked to the emotional strain of difficult social interactions. One participant captured this ambivalence by explaining:

This account illustrates the coexistence of moral affirmation and distress over the perceived gap between personal action and societal change. Similarly, another participant reflected:

Here, participants describe not only emotional conflict but also the need for active regulation – maintaining moral engagement while limiting psychological overwhelm. Together, these accounts illustrate how veganism can simultaneously function as a source of psychological alignment and as an ongoing emotional challenge, requiring individuals to balance moral engagement with emotional self-protection.

Despite these tensions, replies consistently reflected affirmation and reinforcement of the decision to become vegan. Many participants emphasised strong conviction and satisfaction with their choice, describing veganism as a decision they would not reconsider. These statements often reiterated themes of moral alignment and personal clarity, underscoring the stability and durability of participants’ commitment.

Participants commonly described some changes in their relationships after adopting a vegan lifestyle. While some noted that relationships with non-vegan family members, friends, or partners occasionally became more challenging or required adjustment, these changes were not always described as overt conflict or rupture. However, participants also reported a marked loss of belonging within their existing social environments, which in several cases took the form of explicit social exclusion. In parallel, some participants described choosing to withdraw themselves from social situations to avoid repeated discomfort or marginalisation. In contrast, a pronounced and consistently reported sense of belonging emerged in relation to other vegans. Many found new friends and acquaintances and participants frequently described feeling an immediate connection with other vegan individuals, including people they had not previously known. As one participant noted:

This sense of immediate recognition suggests that veganism functioned as a salient identity marker, facilitating rapid perceptions of shared values and mutual understanding. Interactions with other vegans were often characterised by ease and emotional safety. For example, one participant described how:

Such accounts indicate that shared dietary practices symbolised deeper moral alignment, enabling feelings of equality and belonging. Time spent with vegan friends was frequently described as particularly meaningful and supportive. One participant reflected:

Here, shared practices such as cooking and dining together reinforced relational closeness and normalised participants’ lifestyles within a supportive social context.

While most participants refrained from engaging in active activism due to the social-emotional challenges of navigating existing relationships, some made incidental references to gradual changes within their immediate social circles. These observations were typically brief and embedded within broader narratives. Participants mentioned, for example, that family members or friends had reduced their consumption of animal products or chosen vegetarian options more frequently. Importantly, such changes were not described as the result of deliberate persuasion. Rather, they appeared as unintended or cumulative effects of everyday interactions, suggesting that social influence may operate subtly within close relationships even in the absence of explicit advocacy.

Participants frequently highlighted the role of online vegan communities as an important source of support after adopting a vegan lifestyle. These platforms were described as serving practical functions, such as providing information, news, arguments, and recipes, but also fulfilling a broader social role. In particular, online spaces helped participants feel connected to others who share similar values and experiences. This function appeared especially relevant for participants who reported having few or no vegan contacts in their offline social environment. One participant described this dual function of information and belonging:

For these individuals, online communities helped reduce feelings of isolation and reinforced the sense that they were not alone in their lifestyle choice. Similarly, engagement with vegan groups on platforms such as Reddit or Facebook was described as reinforcing a sense of shared presence:

Participants’ accounts revealed a clear differentiation in emotional experiences depending on the social level to which these emotions were directed. When reflecting on themselves and their immediate social relationships, participants more frequently described positive or mixed emotional experiences, including feeling at peace with themselves, experiencing acceptance, and maintaining a sense of belonging, particularly in interactions with other vegans. At the level of close relationships, negative emotions such as frustration or sadness were often accompanied by focusing on positive parts, such as acceptance coming from others.

In contrast, emotional responses became increasingly negative as participants referred to broader social contexts. Interactions within the wider social environment were often characterised by ambivalence, including feelings of frustration, anger, or sadness alongside occasional experiences of hope that the world is making changes in the right direction. At the most distal level, when participants described society as a whole, emotional responses were almost exclusively negative. Society was frequently characterised in terms such as ignorant, selfish, cold, or cruel, and participants did not report corresponding positive emotional experiences at this level.

Taken together, these accounts suggest that emotional experiences related to veganism vary systematically with social proximity. Positive and regulated emotional responses were more commonly described in relation to oneself and close others, whereas negative emotional reactions predominated when participants reflected on society at large. This pattern is illustrated in Figure 1. The figure depicts how participants’ emotional responses differed depending on whether they referred to themselves, their immediate social environment, or society as a whole. Positive and mixed emotions were more commonly described in relation to the individual and close social relationships, whereas negative emotions predominated when participants reflected on society at large. The figure is intended as a conceptual summary of emotional patterns rather than a statistical inference.

In addition to describing current experiences, long-term vegans frequently reflected on changes over time since adopting a vegan lifestyle. Many participants emphasised that aspects of living vegan had improved compared to earlier stages, particularly with regard to the availability of vegan products and options. Increased visibility of vegan food in supermarkets, restaurants, and public spaces was often described as making everyday life easier and reducing practical barriers. Participants also reported changes within their social environments, noting that family members, friends, or colleagues had become more accepting or accommodating over time. These reflections were often framed as a shift from initially negative or challenging experiences toward more manageable or supportive conditions.

At the same time, participants emphasised that such improvements were unevenly distributed across contexts. In particular, rural environments were consistently described as more challenging than urban settings, both in terms of social acceptance and access to vegan options. While urban spaces were perceived as increasingly supportive and normalising of vegan lifestyles, rural areas were often portrayed as slower to change and more resistant to vegan practices.

Consistent with prior research describing veganism as a moral and identity-based lifestyle (Braunsberger & Flamm, 2019; Vestergren & Uysal, 2022), participants predominantly reported positive effects of veganism on their own mental well-being. Living in accordance with personal ethical values was frequently described as fostering inner calm, self-consistency, and psychological relief. This finding aligns with theoretical accounts that conceptualise veganism as a form of moral alignment or integrity, in which behaviour and values become congruent (Greenebaum, 2012). Importantly, these positive experiences were more frequently reported than negative ones when participants reflected on their own sense of self. At the same time, participants’ accounts revealed a clear emotional ambivalence. Heightened awareness of animal suffering, systemic injustice, and institutional protection of animal exploitation was associated with feelings of sadness, frustration, anger, and helplessness. This pattern resonates with recent conceptualisations of “vystopia,” which describe the psychological burden experienced by vegans who perceive widespread moral disregard for animals (Veitch & Gregson, 2025). Thus, while veganism appeared to support psychological coherence at the individual level, it also exposed participants to ongoing emotional strain related to the broader social and political context. The strong sense of moral coherence and decision reinforcement described by participants may help explain why ethical motivations are associated with greater long-term adherence to veganism. Previous research has shown that ethical vegans adhere to a vegan diet for longer periods than individuals motivated primarily by health reasons (Radnitz et al., 2015). On the other hand, ethical vegans are perceived as more arrogantly overcommitted and less socially attractive by omnivores, which might add to the social strain (De Groeve et al., 2022).

A key contribution of this study lies in the differentiation of emotional experiences across social levels. Participants described more positive or regulated emotional responses when reflecting on themselves and their immediate social relationships, whereas emotional reactions became increasingly negative when directed toward society at large. This pattern was evident both in the qualitative data and in the semantic differential ratings, which showed more positive evaluations of veganism at the individual level and more ambivalent or negative evaluations in relation to society. This differentiation suggests that emotional experiences associated with veganism are not uniform but might be shaped by social proximity. Close relationships appear to allow for nuance, adaptation, and regulation, whereas society as an abstract entity was described almost exclusively in negative terms. Such findings extend existing work on vegan stigma and social marginalisation (Cole & Morgan, 2011; MacInnis & Hodson, 2017).

Consistent with previous research highlighting the relational challenges of veganism (Cherry & Asher, 2015; Markowski & Roxburgh, 2019), participants frequently described changes in their social relationships following the transition to veganism. While not all changes involved overt conflict, many participants reported a loss of belonging within their existing social environments, including experiences of explicit social exclusion such as no longer being invited to gatherings. In some cases, participants also described withdrawing from social situations themselves to avoid repeated discomfort or marginalisation. In contrast, a pronounced sense of belonging emerged in relation to other vegans. Participants described immediate feelings of connection, shared understanding, and emotional safety when interacting with other vegan individuals, including those previously unknown to them. This finding aligns with social identity perspectives that emphasise the importance of ingroup belonging for individuals who hold counter-normative moral positions (Rothgerber, 2014). Vegan communities, both offline and online, appeared to function as important sources of validation and support, mitigating feelings of isolation and reinforcing a shared moral identity.

Online vegan communities played a particularly salient role for participants who lacked vegan contacts in their offline lives. These spaces provided not only practical resources but also emotional reassurance and a sense of collective belonging. This finding supports Cherry’s (2015) argument that sustaining veganism requires access to cultural tools and communities that facilitate maintenance. It is important to note that participants were recruited primarily through online forums and social media, which may have increased the likelihood of capturing individuals already engaged in digital spaces. The prominence of online communities in the present findings may therefore partly reflect characteristics of the sampled population. At the same time, given the central role of digital platforms in contemporary lifestyle movements, online engagement is likely to represent an important dimension of vegan social experience for many individuals.

Taken together, the findings suggest that participants actively navigate emotional tension by regulating their engagement across different social contexts. In close relationships, participants often appeared to balance ethical commitment with strategies aimed at preserving social bonds, such as selective engagement or emotional distancing. This pattern aligns with Greenebaum’s (2012) description of “face-saving” strategies employed by vegans to manage social tension and avoid alienation. In contrast, when reflecting on society as a whole, such regulation appeared less necessary, as participants did not depend on maintaining acceptance or approval at this level. This distinction may help explain why participants reported feeling psychologically better within themselves while simultaneously experiencing distress in response to the broader non-vegan world. Emotional regulation may thus be context-dependent, shaped by the perceived possibility of maintaining relationships and avoiding social isolation.

Notably, many participants explicitly distanced themselves from active vegan activism, a finding that contrasts with research suggesting that ethical vegans are typically politically motivated and oriented toward societal change (Braunsberger & Flamm, 2019; Kalte, 2021). Previous research has shown that greater collective efficacy, defined as the belief that vegans can make a positive difference, is associated with stronger engagement in vegan activism (Judge et al., 2022). In the present sample, participants frequently expressed scepticism toward activism and reported a limited sense of personal impact. Interestingly, these accounts contrasted with participants’ casual references to small behavioural changes within their social environment. These incidental observations suggest that influence may occur in less visible and less intentional ways, and that participants may have limited awareness of the cumulative social effects of living according to their values. Taken together, these findings suggest that while individual vegans may experience their impact as minimal, the aggregation of many small, everyday influences across social networks may contribute to broader shifts in norms and practices. This discrepancy between perceived and potential influence may be particularly relevant for understanding feelings of frustration or inefficacy, as meaningful change may occur incrementally alongside, rather than only through, overt activism.

A limitation of this study concerns the gender composition of the sample. This skew can be expected as previous research has found females tend to express more concern for animal welfare and are more likely to be vegetarian (Ruby, 2012). This imbalance has been linked to cultural associations of meat consumption with masculinity (Rothgerber, 2013). Moreover, online and voluntary surveys tend to attract disproportionately higher participation from women (Smith, 2008), which may have further amplified this skew. Consequently, while depicting the real-world composition of gender in veganism, the experiences represented here may reflect the perspectives of women vegans more strongly than those of men. Future research would benefit from targeted recruitment strategies to ensure more balanced gender representation and to explore whether psychosocial experiences of veganism differ across genders. Another limitation concerns the relatively narrow cultural and linguistic scope of the sample. Participants were recruited primarily from German-speaking countries (Austria, Germany, and Switzerland), with the majority residing in Austria. The findings therefore reflect experiences situated within a specific Western, German-speaking sociocultural context. Public discourse surrounding veganism, levels of social acceptance, and structural support for plant-based lifestyles differ across regions and cultures. As such, the psychosocial experiences described here may not be directly transferable to vegans living in different cultural, linguistic, or socio-political environments. Furthermore, some survey items included illustrative examples (e.g., “frustration,” “hope,” or specific social situations) intended to clarify the scope of reflection. While participants were free to respond beyond these prompts, such examples may have influenced the framing or salience of particular emotions and experiences. The wording of open-ended survey questions can shape the data generated, and future research may benefit from more neutral phrasing or alternative strategies to minimise potential anchoring effects.

By focusing on life after the transition to veganism, the present study contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of veganism as a lived moral identity. The findings demonstrate that veganism can foster psychological coherence and a strong sense of belonging within vegan communities, while simultaneously exposing individuals to emotional burden, social exclusion, and moral distress in a predominantly non-vegan world. These experiences vary systematically across social proximity and over time, underscoring the complex interplay between morality, emotion, and social relations in the everyday lives of vegans.