Abstract Targeted interventions have important under-explored potential for reducing meat consumption. We hypothesized that group-specific interventions targeting reduction for reducer, moderate-hindrance, and strong-hindrance meat eaters would be effective. All participants were randomly assigned to one of three treatment conditions designed for these three meat-eating groups, or to a control condition. Following the intervention, up to 28 days of food diaries were gathered to measure their consumption of animal products, which were weighted according to their greenhouse gas emissions. The targeted interventions significantly outperformed the non-targeted interventions. That is, participants in the group-matched (i.e., targeted) conditions reduced their animal product consumption by 40 g of CO2 per day on average, which is approximately equivalent to replacing one chicken-based meal with a vegetarian meal per week, whereas participants in the mismatched conditions showed no significant reduction. The findings suggest that diet-related interventions should focus on supporting meat reducers’ existing behavior intentions, whereas emphasizing meat substitution is a more promising approach for habitual (strong-hindrance) meat eaters.

中文翻译：

---

针对不同肉食群体的干预措施可减少肉类消费

摘要 有针对性的干预措施在减少肉类消费方面具有重要的未开发潜力。我们假设针对减少食肉者、中度阻碍和强阻碍肉食者的特定群体干预将是有效的。所有参与者被随机分配到为这三个肉食组设计的三种治疗条件之一，或控制条件。干预后，收集了长达 28 天的食物日记，以衡量他们对动物产品的消费，并根据他们的温室气体排放进行加权。针对性干预明显优于非针对性干预。也就是说，组匹配（即目标）条件下的参与者平均每天减少 40 克 CO2 的动物产品消耗，这大约相当于每周用素食代替一顿以鸡肉为基础的膳食，而在不匹配条件下的参与者没有显着减少。研究结果表明，与饮食相关的干预措施应侧重于支持减少肉食者现有的行为意图，而强调肉类替代对习惯性（强障碍）肉食者来说是一种更有前景的方法。