Psychology of Human-Animal Intergroup Relations

Becoming Vegan in a Non-Vegan World: A Qualitative Analysis of Social and Psychological Experiences After Adopting a Vegan Lifestyle

Gloria Mittmann — 2026-05-07

Veganism is increasingly understood as a moral lifestyle rather than a dietary choice. This study explores how individuals experience life after becoming vegan, focusing on emotional well-being, social relationships, and perceptions of society. Data were collected via a qualitative online questionnaire and analysed using inductive content analysis; participants also completed semantic differential scales assessing perceptions of veganism. Results indicated that veganism was predominantly experienced as psychologically affirming, characterised by alignment between values and behaviour. Yet participants reported emotional burden related to heightened awareness of animal suffering, social exclusion, and systemic injustice. Emotional experiences varied by social proximity, with more positive or regulated emotions reported in close relationships and predominantly negative emotions directed toward society at large. Online vegan communities emerged as important sources of support. Overall, the findings highlight veganism as a lived moral identity that fosters psychological coherence while requiring ongoing emotional regulation in a largely non-vegan world.

Capturing the Relational Factors Within Human-Companion Animal Relationships That Predict Human Psychological Well-Being and Caring for Companion Animals

Catherine E. Amiot — 2026-05-07

The current study investigated the nature of the psychological connection that exists within the human-companion animal relationship and tested which specific relational factors predict both the guardians’ psychological well-being as well as their tendency to care and feel affection for their companion animal. The following relational factors were investigated: Positive contact with one’s companion animal, quality of the human-companion animal relation, human-companion animal compatibility, attachment to the companion animal, and unconditional acceptance of one’s companion animal. Data from a diverse sample of American pet owners (N = 535) were analyzed. Quality of the human-companion animal relation, unconditional acceptance of one’s companion animal, and positive contact with one’s animal predicted a greater tendency to care and feel affection for the animal. While quality of the human-companion animal relation also predicted higher well-being among guardians, human-companion animal compatibility was a particularly clear predictor of human well-being. In contrast, anxious attachment to one’s companion animal predicted lower human well-being. These associations were observed over and above the role played by sociodemographic and social resources variables. Finally, when levels of human-companion animal compatibility were high, guardians’ caring behaviors for their companion animal were associated positively with their own well-being, suggesting that caring for one’s animal can have positive implications for the guardians’ well-being if they perceive that the personality of their companion animal is highly compatible with their own. These findings confirm the importance of investigating the nature of the human-companion animal relationship, and contribute to identifying factors that can strengthen the benefits that both humans and animals experience within this relationship. By capturing which relational factors predict beneficial outcomes for humans and their companion animals, the current research identifies routes through which we can promote more mutuality within human-companion animal relations

Left-Wing Inertia Toward Animal Advocacy: A Research Blind Spot

Pierce Veitch — 2026-04-09

Evidence for the Common or Usual Name for Plant-Based Food Products

Adam Feltz — 2026-04-09

Common or usual names for food products are important for regulation and consumer understanding. Because some plant-based products aimed at mimicking animal-based products are relatively new, there is little evidence concerning whether those products have common or usual names, and if they do, what those common or usual names might look like. We present evidence from a survey (Study 1) based on vocabulary tests (N = 181) suggesting that using plant-based qualifiers (e.g., ‘veggie’) along with traditional animal terms (e.g., ‘chicken’) is commonly used to identify plant-based meat and dairy analogues. These results are complemented by the results of Study 2 that takes data from posts on social media. Co-occurrence analyses on social media posts indicated that plant-based + animal terms are often used to describe plant-based meat and dairy analogues. Together, these results suggest that consumers may already have common or usual names for many plant-based meat and dairy analogues that often involve plant-based + animal terms. These results may help guide or inform regulations involving plant-based meat and dairy analogues. Changing labels from the common or usual names may reduce consumption of plant-based meat analogues potentially impacting both consumer and animal welfare.

Early Attempts to Stop Eating Meat: Prevalence, Predictors and Outcomes Among UK Youth

Luke McGuire — 2026-03-26

Efforts to reduce meat consumption amongst adults have had mixed success. Recent research has pointed to children as one group who may have more morally inclusive attitudes towards non-human animals, yet less is known regarding their efforts to abstain from meat consumption. Using a retrospective survey with a sample of emerging adults in the UK (pre-screen study n = 1063, M age = 22.5, main study n = 461, M Age = 22.2), this study documents that approximately half of participants reported having thought about stopping eating meat while they were growing up (i.e., before they finished secondary school). In turn, half of these participants did stop for a period ranging from days to permanent abstinence. Parental support was a strong predictor of being able to stop eating meat. Most participants started eating meat again, largely for reasons of taste and convenience. Together these findings point to youth as a leveraging point for greater uptake of plant-based food options, although current pragmatic and structural barriers limit youth efforts to do so.

Where Human–Animal Psychology Is Going Next: Introduction to Special Section of Commentaries

Kristof Dhont — 2026-02-19

What’s in a Diet? Conceptual and Methodological Challenges in Classifying Dietary Groups

Sam Vellana — 2026-02-19

Despite longstanding calls for scientific consensus on the definitions and categorisation of animal-restrictive dietary groups (Ruby, 2012; Rosenfeld, 2018), significant discrepancies remain. Urgency to address this issue is only growing, as dietary diversity increases. Without a shared conceptual and methodological framework, the field risks hindering theoretical integration and meta-analytic work. In this commentary, we highlight two key considerations in dietary group categorisation, calling for greater clarity, consistency and collaboration to strengthen cumulative progress in the field.

Rethinking the Measurement of Speciesism: Conceptual and Methodological Considerations

Teresa Schenk — 2026-02-19

Reaching the Right: Engaging Conservatives in Animal Welfare

Sandro Jenni — 2026-01-23

Time Matters: Temporal Dimensions of Change in Animal-Product Consumption and Animal Attitudes

Lotte de Lint — 2026-01-16