Psychological differences and similarities between vegans, prospective vegans, and vegetarians. Motivation, knowledge, vegan literacy – and cheese

The study investigates why vegans and vegetarians, despite shared motivations such as animal welfare and environmental concerns, adopt different dietary behaviors—vegans avoiding all animal products and vegetarians consuming some (e.g., dairy and eggs). It asks which psychological factors (motivation, cognition, knowledge, dietarian identity, affectivity, social context, feasibility, and specific food barriers like cheese) differentiate vegans from vegetarians and characterize prospective vegans who occupy a transitional position. Given the environmental and health implications of animal-derived food consumption and the frequent conflation of vegans and vegetarians in psychological research, the study aims to clarify distinct psychological profiles and mechanisms that may facilitate or hinder transitioning to veganism.

Prior work shows animal-based diets negatively affect the environment and that vegan diets can have health benefits. Psychological research often groups vegans with vegetarians despite meaningful differences in behaviors, beliefs, values, and ideals. Vegans tend to hold stronger environmental/animal rights beliefs, greater idealism and empathy, and perceive diet as more central to identity than vegetarians. Knowledge is implicated as crucial in transitioning to and maintaining plant-based diets, yet differences in knowledge between vegans and vegetarians are underexplored. Social contexts matter: support facilitates, while stigma and discrimination hinder plant-based diets; vegans report more social criticism than vegetarians. Habit and taste can impede change, and media portrayals may reduce perceived feasibility. These literatures motivate examining motivation, knowledge (including misconceptions around cheese and the animal industry), identity, affectivity, and social-environmental influences across vegans, vegetarians, and prospective vegans.

Design: Descriptive, cross-sectional online survey conducted Oct–Dec 2021. Recruitment via social media posts in German-speaking vegan/vegetarian groups; voluntary participation without restrictions. Ethics: No ethics approval required under German law; GDPR-compliant anonymization; informed consent obtained. Sample: 1,776 started; 356 excluded (non-vegan/vegetarian, missing/unclear or contradictory data, flagged low-engagement including time-RSI>2); final N=1,420: vegans N=1,046; prospective vegans N=197; vegetarians N=177. Demographics: Predominantly female; mostly resident in Germany/Austria/Switzerland; mean ages approximately 37.7 (vegans), 32.0 (prospective), 30.1 (vegetarians). Measures: - Dietary patterns: current/previous/future diet; duration; reasons for current/future diet. - Barriers: perceived difficulty giving up food types (milk, cheese, other dairy, eggs, fish/meat) rated on 5-point Likert scales (1 not difficult–5 very difficult). - Self-assessed knowledge and evaluation: knowledge of diets (0–100), knowledge of the animal industry (0–100), assessment of the animal industry (0–100; lower scores indicating more negative assessment). - Communicative knowledge (McDonald, 2000): 19 true/false items (with “don’t know” option) on animal industry practices, environmental impacts, and nutrition (some reverse-coded); percent correct computed. - Information behaviors: sources consulted (books, cookbooks, scientific studies, newspapers, talks, social networks, documentaries, informational programs, dieticians/physicians, social environment, other) and time spent per month (<1, 1–2, 3–4, 5–10, >10 hours). - Attitude toward vegan lifestyle: 15 items (5-point Likert; reverse-coded items included). - Instrumental knowledge (McDonald, 2000): 14 items on feasibility and practical know-how of vegan living (5-point Likert; reverse-coded items included). - Dietarian identity: Dietarian Identity Questionnaire (Rosenfeld & Burrow, 2018). - Affectivity/emotional connection: items from Connectedness to Nature Scale (Perrin & Benassi, 2009), capturing empathy/connectedness to animals and nature (5-point Likert; reverse-coded items included). Scoring: Mean scores computed for attitude, instrumental knowledge, dietarian identity, and affectivity. Analytic strategy: Group comparisons (vegans, prospective vegans, vegetarians) via ANOVAs/MANOVAs with Tukey-HSD post hocs when appropriate; Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney tests for nonparametric comparisons (e.g., time spent on information); repeated-measures ANOVA for difficulty of giving up food types; linear regression among vegans to predict duration of vegan diet from dietarian identity, attitude, affectivity, communicative knowledge, and instrumental knowledge. Additional comparisons among vegetarians who could vs could not imagine becoming vegan.

• Motivations: Across all groups, animal rights/welfare and ecological/sustainability were top reasons; health was also cited. Significant group differences for multiple motives: animal rights/welfare F(2,1417)=7.51, p=0.001, η²=0.010; ecological/sustainability F(2,1417)=3.52, p=0.030, η²=0.005; general health F(2,1417)=9.76, p<0.001, η²=0.014; taste F(2,1417)=5.18, p=0.006, η²=0.007; habit F(2,1417)=19.61, p<0.001, η²=0.027; social environment F(2,1417)=30.70, p<0.001, η²=0.042; feasibility F(2,1417)=8.49, p<0.001, η²=0.012. For prospective vegans’ intent to become vegan: key reasons were animal rights/welfare (80.7%), ecological/sustainability (70.6%), and health (26.9%). - Perceived barriers and specific foods: Significant differences in perceived difficulty giving up animal-derived foods: main effect of group F(2,1357)=162.34, p<0.001, ηp²=0.19; all pairwise differences significant. Food-type differences also significant (Fs>148.52, ps<0.001) with interactions between lifestyle and food type (Fs>3.59, ps<0.028). Cheese emerged as particularly difficult to give up, especially for vegetarians and prospective vegans. - Knowledge (self-assessed): Diet knowledge (vegans M=79.52, SD=14.90; prospective M=73.40, SD=17.03; vegetarians M=72.64, SD=17.52), animal industry knowledge (vegans M=89.17, SD=14.60; prospective M=84.47, SD=15.44; vegetarians M=76.20, SD=17.94), and assessment of animal industry (vegans M=6.07, SD=18.05; prospective M=7.23, SD=16.81; vegetarians M=11.07, SD=14.51) differed: diet knowledge F(2,1417)=24.06, p<0.001, ηp²=0.033; animal industry knowledge F(2,1417)=52.29, p<0.001, η²=0.076; assessment F(2,1417)=6.25, p=0.002, η²=0.009. Many vegans (67.3%) and prospective vegans (56.9%) gave the most negative possible assessment of the animal industry vs 30.5% of vegetarians. - Communicative knowledge (percent correct): vegans M=0.90 (SD=0.08), prospective vegans M=0.83 (SD=0.10), vegetarians M=0.76 (SD=0.13); F(2,1417)=180.03, p<0.001, ηp²=0.203; all pairwise ps<0.001. Example items about cheese and animal death showed higher accuracy among vegans and prospective vegans than vegetarians (e.g., “Cheese is always vegetarian” [false]: vegans 90.63% correct; prospective 87.82%; vegetarians 80.79%). - Information behaviors: Time spent monthly acquiring information differed: H(2)=120.95, p<0.001, η²=0.083; vegans>prospective>vegetarians (all pairwise ps<0.001). Sources of information differed (MANOVA): books F=43.82, p<0.001; cookbooks F=8.26, p<0.001; scientific studies F=45.57, p<0.001; talks F=29.08, p<0.001; social networks F=4.24, p=0.015; documentaries F=7.51, p<0.001; social environment F=13.21, p<0.001; no differences for newspapers, informational programs, dieticians/physicians, or “other.” Vegans reported consulting scientific studies more often; this was not explained by education level (H(2)=0.21, p=0.898). - Psychosocial constructs (Table 2): Group differences in dietarian identity F(2,1417)=20.36, p<0.001, η²=0.03; attitude F(2,1417)=97.37, p<0.001, η²=0.12; affectivity F(2,1417)=8.41, p<0.001, η²=0.01; instrumental knowledge F(2,1417)=301.55, p<0.001, η²=0.30. Post hocs: vegans and prospective vegans similar on dietarian identity and affectivity, both higher than vegetarians; vegans had more pro-vegan attitudes than both other groups; all groups differed on instrumental knowledge. - Regression (vegans only): Duration of vegan diet predicted by attitude (β=0.14, p<0.001) and instrumental knowledge (β=0.07, p=0.017); dietarian identity was a negative predictor (β=-0.11, p<0.001). Affectivity and communicative knowledge were not significant predictors. - Among vegetarians: Those who could imagine becoming vegan vs those who could not differed in dietarian identity (F(1,167)=10.64, p<0.001, ηp²=0.060), assessment of the animal industry (F(1,167)=12.87, p<0.001, ηp²=0.072), and instrumental knowledge (F(1,167)=4.21, p=0.042, ηp²=0.025); attitude, affectivity, communicative knowledge, and self-assessed knowledge were not significantly different.

The findings address the central question of why similar motivations lead to different dietary behaviors by showing that knowledge differences—operationalized as communicative knowledge, time spent seeking information, and reliance on credible sources—distinguish vegans from vegetarians, with prospective vegans occupying an intermediate position. This supports the concept of vegan literacy: a cluster of factual and practical knowledge about diet, animal rights/welfare, and environmental impacts that enables translating ethical motives into consistent vegan behavior. Taste and habit, especially regarding cheese, appear to hinder transitions, potentially reflecting both entrenched preferences and possible addictive-like responses. Social environment and perceived feasibility also differentiate groups; vegans report less reliance on social environment as an information source and view feasibility less as a barrier, while vegetarians and prospective vegans perceive greater social/feasibility obstacles. Dietarian identity and affectivity are higher among vegans and prospective vegans compared to vegetarians, suggesting identity and emotional connection facilitate transition, though among established vegans, longer duration may be associated with reduced identity centrality. Overall, the pattern indicates that enhancing accurate knowledge and practical competence, while addressing taste/habit barriers (notably cheese) and social feasibility, may help align shared ethical motivations with vegan behavior.

Knowledge emerged as the most influential factor differentiating vegans from vegetarians and facilitating the transition toward veganism. Vegans possess higher communicative and instrumental knowledge, spend more time learning from credible sources, and assess the animal industry more negatively. Prospective vegans consistently fall between vegans and vegetarians, reflecting a transitional stage. Barriers including taste, habit, and perceived feasibility—especially centered on cheese—also contribute to differences in behavior. Increasing access to reliable information and practical guidance (vegan literacy) is likely to support motivated individuals in adopting vegan diets. Future research should examine gender influences, further interrogate the potentially addictive nature of cheese, explore why knowledge acquisition differs across groups, and test generalizability beyond German-speaking contexts using diverse methods (e.g., longitudinal and experimental designs).

The study is cross-sectional and based on a self-selected online sample, limiting causal inference and generalizability. The predominantly female, German-speaking sample may restrict applicability across genders and cultures. Measures rely on self-report (potential biases), and former vegans were too few to analyze. Results are exploratory, not experimental; thus, mechanisms should be corroborated with longitudinal/experimental studies. Additional limitations include unmeasured factors that might influence information seeking and feasibility, and potential cultural variability in product availability and social norms.