"Why we (do not) substitute meat" : Exploring how households with elementary school children explain their intentions and behaviour (gap) regarding meat substitute consumption.

(1)

“Why we (do not)

substitute meat

”

MASTER

THESIS WITHIN: Business Administration NUMBER OF CREDITS: 15

PROGRAMME OF STUDY: International Marketing AUTHOR: Danielle Vreeburg, Romaena de Regt JÖNKÖPING May 2021

Exploring how households with elementary school

children explain their intentions and behaviour (gap)

regarding meat substitute consumption.

(2)

i

Master Thesis in Business Administration

Title:

“Why we (do not) substitute meat”

Authors:

D. E. Vreeburg and R. M. de Regt

Tutor:

Tomas Müllern

Date:

2021-05-24

Key terms: Intention-behaviour gap, meat substitutes, meat consumption, self-explaining,

qualitative.

Abstract

Background: The consumption of meat in western societies keeps growing. This leads to a paradox, with a growing awareness in the society of health and

environmental issues regarding meat consumption and a growing willingness to substitute meat more often.

Purpose: Explore the intentions of households with elementary school children to consume meat substitutes and to match these intentions with the actual behaviour to find the extent of the intention-behaviour gap and how they explain their intentions, behaviour, and potential disconnect.

Method: To understand the actual behaviour of the households, two weeks' worth of grocery receipts were collected and analysed. To explore intentions, additional semi-structured interviews were conducted, where the

participants got the opportunity to explain their intentions, behaviour, and gap.

Conclusion: The results show that there are three types of consumers, depending on the level of intention. The profiles differ whether they feel the need to explain their intention or the intention-behaviour gap. To explain themselves, All profiles state that meat is too delicious to leave out and that meat is a habit formed in childhood. Depending on the profile, additional reasoning was more internal or external.

(3)

ii

Acknowledgements

We would like to use this opportunity to express our sincere appreciation and graduate to everyone who helped or supported us in the process of writing our master thesis. A special thanks to Tomas Müllern, our supervisor, for guiding us with great advice and feedback. We truly appreciate all the time he committed as our mentor and always having coffee ready for our meetings. In addition, we would like to express our gratefulness to the participants, to give us the opportunity to gain a better understanding of their line of arguing for meat substituting. Finally, we would like to thank our friends and families, for encouraging us in this journey.

Danielle Vreeburg & Romaena de Regt, Jönköping University, May 2021

(4)

iii

Figures

Figure 1 A schematic representation of variables in the VBN theory of environmentalism 10

Figure 2 Visual representation of the connection of theories 14

Figure 3 Visual representation of three profiles 27

Figure 4 Visual representation of the coherence in the analysis 40

Tables

Table 1 Ages children participants 25

Table 2 Themes in relation to profiles 33

Appendix

Appendix 1 Interview Guide 57

Appendix 2 Receipts Analysis Example 58

Appendix 3 Coding Process 59

(6)

1

1. Introduction

_________________________________________________________________________________ This first chapter will provide insight into the topic of meat substitute consumption and the motivation and relevance of this study. First, the background will be presented followed by arguments for the practical, methodical, and theoretical relevance of this study. Finally, the research problem and purpose will be stated.

___________________________________________________________________________

1.1 Background; Meat Consumption and the Need for Change?

Who can resist the temptation of a well-cooked medium-rare steak for dinner? For many western societies, meat-based diets are the norm (Sanchez-Sabate et al., 2019). North America, Oceania, and Europe have the highest per capita meat consumption compared t o other continents (95, 71, and 65 in kilos respectively) (OECD; FAO, as cited by Van de Pass, 2020). The meat we eat is a nutritionally important, and complex part of our day-to-day consumption (Troy & Kerry, 2010). However, according to the EAT-lancet report “Food in the Anthorpence” by 2050, it will be impossible to feed an estimated population of 10 billion people in a sustainable and healthy way, if we continue consuming meat in the manner we do at the moment (Willet et al., 2019). There are several critical reports published by the FAO (Food and Agricultural Organisation) stating the problems of the ecological impact of the high levels of meat in diets. Stressing the high need for solutions that can ensure the sustainability goals are met (Tubiello et al., 2014; Jansson & Berggren, 2015). As a result, society is getting more and more aware of this major contribution meat production and consumption pays to global warming and environmental damage (Tilman et al., 2002; Bouwman et al., 2013). A 2017 survey by ING concluded that almost 30% of Europeans are willing to reduce meat consumption over the next five years. Despite the growing concerns related to climate change, the motivation to reduce meat intake is mainly health-related (40%), with animal welfare (17%), expanses (14%), and negative environmental effects (12%) as other main reasons (ING, as cited by Van de Pas, 2020). Studies of the last decade show that a meat -heavy diet is associated with many serious health conditions varying from cardiovascular diseases, type two diabetes, and even forms of cancer. Besides, the global obesity problem is partly blamed on the meat-heavy diets that are often the norm, affecting 20% of the world's adult population (Sofi et al., 2010). The World Obesity Federation expects by 2030 that 250 million children and adolescents will be obese (Lobstein & Brinsden, 2019).

Despite these two major concerns related to meat, there is no decline in consumption but an increase; from 2013 until 2019 the per capita yearly meat consumption in kilos grew from 67,6 to 70,2 in western European countries (European Commission, as cited by Van de Pas, 2020). For example, in the Netherlands, the average meat consumption per person is increasing with a half a kilo rate per year

(7)

2

(Dagevos et al., 2019). To stop this growth, researchers are trying to gain a better understanding of the benefits associated with diets focussing more on plant-based protein sources, to stimulate the development of meat-reduction and meat-substitution products (Hallström et al., 2014; de Boer et al., 2014). Meat substitutes are plant-based products that are alternatives for meat. These products can look and taste like meat and have the potential to play a role in encouraging dietary change (Hoek et al., 2011; de Bakker & Dagevos, 2012). Nowadays in western society, we cannot imagine a supermarket without these meat substitutes. Consequently, steady growth is present in the meat substitute market, with fast -growing sales over the last couple of years. In 2015 the sales valu e of meat substitutes in western Europe grew from 1350 million U.S. dollars to 2247 million U.S. dollars (GlobalData, as cited by Van de Pas, 2020). This used to be very different; the first meat substitutes were introduced in the late 19th century only on a very low scale. In the 1960s tofu and thempe began to gain popularity, in the last 15 years, meat substitutes and mock meats really made an appearance. With the help of improved technologies, meat substitutes are now truly mass-market accepted products (Hunt, 2020). This acceptance in meat substitute consumption goes hand-in-hand with the growth in the number of people with a flexitarian lifestyle (consciously reducing the meat intake to +/- 3 days a week) and vegetarian, and vegan diets, especially in western European countries. The Netherlands is one of the frontrunners of the movement; with 11% of the population following a flexitarian lifestyle compared to a European average of 5% (Van de Pas, 2020).

1.2 Problem Definition

Given the earlier stated facts and arguments, it can be concluded that there is a disconnect. Despite the increased awareness of health and environment-related risks of meat consumption, and the trend in switching to meat substitutes, this is not reflected in the numbers: the meat consumption per capita keeps rising. This suggests an intention-behaviour gap in western society regarding meat reduction and meat substitute consumption. This assumption is supported by earlier research, several articles identify and acknowledge an intention-behaviour gap in product groups that are similar to meat substitutes, in the sense that they are environmentally conscious alternatives, like organic groceries or ethical consumption in general (Frank & Brock, 2018; Carrington et al., 2010; Carrington et al., 2014). There is also evidence of an intention-behaviour gap in behaviour that is comparable to meat substitutes, not from an environmental- but from a health point of view, like physical activity or the use of sunscreen (Rhodes & de Bruijn, 2013; Allom et al., 2013). The 2013 study by Rhodes and de Bruijn identified an overall intention-behaviour gap of 46% in physical activity caused by a high number of intenders who are not successful at following through with their physical activity. With all of these factors combined, the expectation can be confirmed, and it can be assumed that there is in fact an intention -behaviour gap in meat substitute consumption.

(8)

3

However, there is little research related to the intention -behaviour gap in the field of meat substitute consumption. Moreover, exploring how individuals explain themselves, regarding intention, behaviour and a potential gap is a valuable and innovative addition to this field of research. Until now numerous studies focussed more on consumer acceptance, perception, or consumption patterns of meat substitute products (Hoek et al., 2011; Elzerman et al, 2013; Hoek et al, 2013; Schölsler et al., 2012). According to Hoek et al. (2011), who investigated consumer acceptance of meat substitutes, all types of uses are aware of the positive ethical aspects of these products, but only heavy users have high motivations to actually choose the more ethical option. In addition, non -users of meat substitutes tend to steer away from new foods, explaining the lack of meat substitute consumption (Hoek et al., 2011). This is in tune with the findings of the 2013 study by Hoek et al., exploring whether new meat substitutes are better appreciated after repeated consumption. Having previous experience with the consumption of meat substitutes leads to a higher liking of these types of products. The study proved that the appreciation of the meat substitute products increased by repeated consumption for at least a segment of consumers (Hoek et al., 2013). Weinrich (2019) conducted a review of empirical research that has been done on consumer's adoption of meat substitutes. He concluded that there is a lack of research in the stage of confirmation; explaining if consumers in fact follow through with their intentions and behaviour. Therefore, he suggests further research exploring this matter.

On top of this, with this high number of research in the meat substitute consumption field, it has not been linked to children and their parents. While shaping children's dietary habits in a positive way is critical to avoid the aforementioned extremely high expected obesity rate and irreversible environmental damage. In the process of developing dietary and healthy habits, childhood is a crucial period as a result of the cognitive schema's that are developed in this period. Especially parents and the family environment play the biggest role in influencing these developments (Lazarou et al., 2008; Wolnicka el at., 2015). Dietary preferences and habits are strongly rooted in childhood, increasing the before explained effect that also meat substitutes are more appreciated by people who have previous experiences with these types of products (Hoek et al., 2013). The previous mention study proved that children's dietary beliefs and behaviours are highly influenced by their parents eating habits and quality of diet (Lazarou et al., 2008). This knowledge can help shape children's eating habits in a healthy and more sustainable manner, for example reducing meat intake by replacing it with meat subst itute products.

1.3 Research Purpose

It can be concluded that children are highly influenced by their parents, and rightly shaping their behaviour and beliefs, potentially can have the biggest positive impacts in the future of the aforementioned health and climate problems the world is facing. Additionally, there is limited previous research regarding the intention-behaviour gap in meat substitute consumption. This thesis addresses

(9)

4

both issues, and the question arises whether families with elementary school children who intend to eat less meat and more meat substitutes really do so, or if their behaviour remains the same. To explore the understanding of the questions if and why this intention -behaviour gap arises, a method of combining observations on shopping and eating habits with in-depth interviews reflecting upon these observations will be in place. This unique combination of methods in the field of intention -behaviour gap research enables the researchers to reflect with participants on their actual beh aviour. Doing so while avoiding a potential social desirability bias in stating their behaviours or intentions, by completely limiting their knowledge of the purpose of the study while conducting the observations and avoiding the confrontation with the intention-behaviour gap before having explored their true intentions. Accordingly, the purpose of this thesis is to explore the intentions of households with elementary school children to consume meat substitutes and to match these intentions with the actual behaviour to find the extent of the intention-behaviour gap and how they explain their intentions, intention-behaviour, and potential disconnect.

(10)

5

2. Theoretical Frame of Reference

_________________________________________________________________________________ To facilitate the readers’ understanding, this chapter will contain a clear review of existing literature on the topic and the chosen theories to help to answer the research questions. The concepts, models, and theories that will be presented are meat (substitute) consumption, the four N-model, intention-behaviour gap, value belief norm of environmentalism and attribution theory. These will be used as a context when analysing the findings of this study.

___________________________________________________________________________

To sustain a theoretical frame of reference, a literature review has been conducted with the help of keywords. Keywords such as meat (substitutes) consumption, intention-behaviour gap, self-explaining, and sustainable consumption have been searched for in the primo library. Based on founded articles, sources from their reference list have been used as well as expending the keywords with terms like; 3 and 4 N-model, value belief norm theory and the attribution theory. The literature review will be elaborated on in the following sub-chapters.

2.1 Meat (Substitute) Consumption

Meat is an important source of nutrients and proteins, but too much meat consumption has a negative impact on the environment. The last decades have shown a huge increase in the consumption of especially, poultry and pig meats (Basu, 2015; Milford et al., 2019). However, most of the meat consumption (60%) still consists of red meat, like pork, sheep and beef (Salter, 2018). A recent review of González et al. (2020) researches the current risk the earth is facing with the consumption of meat nowadays. They stated that meat consumption has been rapidly increasing from th e 1980s to today. He found that some studies show some alarming increase in meat consumption, an increase of 500% between 1992 and 2016 (Katare et al., 2020). Those studies have shown that the dietary habits have changed over the centuries. Bonnet et al. (2020), recently published a report of the meat consumption trends within Europe, the reports show the change of dietary habits from the 1960s till today. In the 1960’s most of the proteins came from plant-derived products, while nowadays the major source of protein comes from meat products and takes into account 30% of the total calories consumed. Just a small portion of the population considers themselves to be vegetarian (5%) and a bigger scoop considers themselves as flexitarian; a diet based on less meat consumption (Kemper, 2020). With these changes, researchers are trying to find the reasons behind the growth of meat consumption and how to fight this. One of the studies focused on the meat consumption among healthcare professionals (Alparslan & Demirbaş, 2020). They were wondering if the health education affects the meat intake of red meat and processed red meat products. The result of this study was that 96% of the respondents still consume red meat even though they were aware of the negative health consequences, but they are more careful with the consumption of processed red meat. Another study (Rothgerber, 2013) investigated the meat

(11)

6

justification of men, whereby he discovers that some threats to hegemonic masculinity are caused by metrosexuals. Linking meat to masculinity is something that he has seen in a lot of mainstream media, like fast-food marketing communication. Therefore, Rothgerber suggests the perception of individuals to regain their masculinity partly through meat consumption. Also, Adams (1990) says that meat consumption is linked to masculinity because it raises the strength of male power. De Boer et al. (2014) explores strategies to fight meat consumption. Their study focusses on Dutch consumers, they consume 60% more protein than the daily intake recommendation, one third of this protein comes from meat supplies. To change this, the consumers should change some activities and steps that are involved in their eating behaviour. To encourage this behaviour, De Boer et al. (2014) suggests promoting one or more meatless days and take this as a step-by-step approach.

Meatless days can involve meat substitutes, which can have a similar taste, texture and appearance to meat and can be a replacement of it in the diet (Tziva et al., 2020). As stated in the introduction, meat substitutes are existing for several decades and are widely available. The European market for meat substitutes has recently seen a growth in consumption, for example in the Netherlands the annual growth is between approximately 5-10% (ChangingMarketsFoundation, 2018). Nonetheless, the adjustment from meat-to-meat substitutes by consumers is still slow, a reason for this can be that the meat substitutes do not resemble the taste and structure of meat (Elzerman et al., 2013). Another reason can be the influence of the meal context (Elzerman et al., 2021) or the social and situational context of the consumer (López-Espinoza et al., 2007). Thus, it can be concluded that a lot of research has been done on meat substitutes. Elzerman et al. (2021) seek to answer the qu estion of whether the meat substitutes fit within the same usage situations as meat does. They found that in most of the situation's meat products were seen as more appropriate than the meat substitutes. This study also showed the effect of gender and age in the appropriateness ratings, youngsters and women gave a higher rating to meat alternatives and meat substitutes; this is in line with the previously explained study of Rothgerber (2013) that suggests the link between meat and masculinity. The study of Apostolidis and McLeay (2016) explores how benefits and values influence the consumers' preferences for the meat substitutes and their perception of how this product manufacturer can motivate consumers to replace meat. They found out that hedonism and conformity were identified as important values that drive the purchases of meat substitutes. Moreover, the taste, easiness and fit in current lifestyle were curial according to this study. As stated before, lots of research has been done on this topic, therefore Weinrich (2019) made a review of empirical research that has been done on consumer’s adoption of meat substitutes which were published up to the spring of 2018. He classified the articles in five different stages (following the innovation -decision process): knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation and confirmation. The results of this review show that the most crucial factors are the taste and the appearance of meat substitutes to apply them in their dietary habits on a regular base instead of environmental, health and animal welfare. Weinrich identified a lack

(12)

7

of research in the stage of confirmation, which explains that consumers sometimes revise their decisions. Therefore, he suggests for future research to adopt this subject. Weinrich’s research proves the fact that there is a lack of knowledge on the reason why there is a gap between intention and behaviour among this subject and therefore supports the importance of this thesis.

2.2 Intention-Behaviour Gap

The intention-behaviour gap is the disconnect that occurs when the values, attitude or intentions of an individual do not match their actions or actual behaviour. This phenomenon is not only referred to as the intention-behaviour gap, but also the attitude-behaviour gap (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980), or the value-action gap (Blake, 1999). However, they all generally refer to the same concept: the difference between what individuals say, and what they do (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). The intention-behaviour gap is a topic that has been widely studied by several researchers. Many factors are suggested to contribute to this gap but are still up for debate (Gollwitzer, 1999; Auger & Devinney, 2007).

Several studies in the field of the intention-behaviour gap are related to ethical or environmental conscious consumption behaviour. Like the 2009 study by Kennedy et al., that noticed that 72% of their respondents self-identified a gap between their intentions and actions regarding environmentally supportive behaviour. Suggesting that a majority of people are aware of their intention-behaviour gap and dare to admit to this. Most of the research however does not look at people admitting to an intention-behaviour gap, or people explaining their gap. But they use theory to measure the extent of the gap, explanation and how to close it. An example of this is the 2014 research by Carrington et al., who identified four interrelated factors affecting the intention -behaviour gap in ethical shopping behaviour, namely prioritization of ethical concerns, the formation of plans and habits, willingness to commit and sacrifice, and modes of shopping behaviour. A 2016 paper by Hassan et al. investigated whether there is in fact an intention-behaviour gap in ethical consumption, suggested by several research papers. They stated that the factors that influence the extent of this proclaimed gap in ethical consumption and its magnitude had not been systematically examined yet. They found that even though many studies are assessing both intention and behaviour, only a few studies assessed the relationship between intention and behaviour. However, they could also conclude that there is a large gap between intention and behaviour in ethical consumption based on the review of empirical studies. They conclude that there is a need for more empirical studies to explore the complex relationship between both intention and behaviour (Hassan et al., 2016).

There is clear popularity to link the intention -behaviour gap to ethical and environmental conscious consumption behaviour. It is not just limited to these topics, there is also a lot of research available exploring the intention-behaviour gap in the context of health-related behaviour. This makes the intention-behaviour gap a fitting concept for this study since both health, environment and other ethical

(13)

8

issues are important reasons for consumers to reduce meat consumption and opt for meat substitute products (ING, as cited by Van de Pas, 2020). The 2013 study by Rhodes and de Bruijn measured the intention-behaviour gap in physical activity with the action control framework. They identified an overall intention-behaviour gap of 48% caused by a high number of intenders who are not successful at following through with their physical activity. With the results of this study, it could be concluded that there is a weakness in early models explaining intention and predicting behaviour, at least in the context of understanding physical activity. According to Orbell and Sheeran (1998), predicting health-related behaviour based on intentions is often unreliable, and the strength of the intention and behaviour can vary drastically per type of behaviour. Individuals' behaviour can often be better predicted based on past behaviour than intention.

As stated before, the intention-behaviour gap is a phenomenon that often occurs in consumer behaviour and associated studies. Different researchers have used a number of theoretical frameworks from different research domains, like business ethics, sociology, and psychology (Carrington et al., 2010). In the context of the intention-behaviour gap in environmentally conscious behaviour, many theoretical frameworks have been explored and developed to explain this gap, despite all this effort no definitive explanation has been identified (Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002). Like the barriers between environmental concern and pro-environmental behaviour identified in the 1999 article by Blake. Blake proposes individuality, responsibility and practicality as the three barriers in the intention -behaviour gap for environmental policy. Individual barriers are the ones that are within the individual itself concerning attitude and temperament, responsible barriers regard the feeling of not being able to influence the situation, or it not being their responsibility and finally, practical barriers being institutional constraints (Blake, 1999). Blakes model combines both internal and external factors in detail, he fails to incorporate important social factors (e.g. social desirability bias or cultural norms) and the ability to reflect. Also, in the context of health behaviour some theoretical models argue that forming an intention is crucial for performing the actual behaviour; like the theory of planned behaviour (Azjen, 1991) or the health action process approach (Schwarzer, 1999; Allom et al., 2013). Many research papers have identified a disconnect between the intention to behave, and the actual behaviour, bringing out a theoretical gap; the intention-behaviour gap which attempted to be explained with numerous frameworks (Sniehotta et al., 2005).

The purpose of this thesis is not to measure the extent of the intention -behaviour gap, or directly explain why it occurs or how to close it. But, with the well-argued assumption that there is an intention-behaviour gap, this thesis seeks to explore how the participants of the study feel about this gap, and how they explain and reflect on their behaviour not matching their intentions. Based on the literature review, we identified three factors in theory that are crucial to explore and reflect on the intention-behaviour

(14)

9

gap. The first one is rationalization, by which the four N-model is relevant by identifying the rationalisation of meat consumption by it being Natural, Normal, Necessary and Nice. Secondly, the acknowledgement of the individual to be part of the problem and solution in a societal setting, which can be explained by the value belief norm theory of environmentalism with the adverse consequences of the valued object and the perceived ability to reduce the thread. Finally, the third factor finding causes to blame the existence of the gap, which the attribution theory will help to explore by dividing it into internal and external factors. Some additional theories were reviewed, like the transtheoretical model by Prochaska and DiClemente (2005) or the theory of planned behaviour by Ajzen (1991). However, for these theories, the focus is more on how intentions and behaviour are formed, and not on how individuals explain them or the gap. Therefore, the three aforementioned concepts and theories that do support this personal explanation will be reviewed, thereby helping to provide a theoretical base and context for this thesis.

2.2.1 The Four N-Model

As stated before, meat consumption is deeply rooted in western dietary habits, to explain this behaviour the 4N-model can be used. This theory is used in context to how individuals rationalise the intention-behaviour gap in meat substitute consumption. The model primarily existed of 3N's made by Joy (2010), also known as the “Three N's of Justification”, and justifies the behaviour of meat -eaters. The three N's stand for Natural, Normal and Necessary. Natural justifies the belief of people that meat is natu ral and written in our biology, Normal justifies the attitude that eating meat is expected from us and most people do it, and Necessary justifies the need for meat in order to survive and to be healthy. Piazza et al. (2015) argued that the 3N-model is also applicable in different contexts next to meat -eating, he argued for adding a fourth N to the model to make it specific for just meat consumption. He suggests that eating meat is seen as enjoyment and is a major barrier to reduce meat or/and adopting a meatless diet (Kenyon & Barker, 1998; Lea & Worsley, 2001; 2003; Ruby, 2012). Accordingly, Piazza et al. (2015) found that enjoyment was highly important according to their study and largely ignored by theorists, therefore they added the justification Nice to the model. The 4N-Model, therefore, consists of Natural, Normal, Necessary and Nice. Although the model is not widely used, some studies did adopt this model in their studies about meat consumption. Hopwood and Bleidorn (2019) adopted this model to examine the individual differences in values, personality and vegetarian eating motives. They found underlying values and personalities of people who use different justifications for their meat consumption. Another study by Earle et al. (2019) uses this model to investigate the negative attributes towards vegans/vegetarians, the 4N-model was used in one of their tests as a moderator on the relationship between emotions and experimental condition. Therefore, it can be concluded that his model does not only help explaining behaviour but also helps to gain insights into the rationalization of whether this consumption behaviour matches the intentions.

(15)

10 2.2.2 Value Belief Norm Theory of Environmentalism

The value belief norm theory of environmentalism, further mentioned as VBN theory, is a theory that explains the influences of human values on their behaviour in an environmentalist context. The VBN theory states the causal relationships between values, beliefs, norms, and behaviours (Choi et al., 2015; Stern et al., 1999; Stern, 2000). This theory was established by Stern et al. (1999). Stern et al. (1999) suggest that individuals accept a movement's basic values, that they believe that their valued objects are threatened, and they believe that their actions (behaviour) can help reconstruct those values, experiences and personal norms for a pro-movement action. In a 2000 article, Stern proposed a schematic representation of the VBN theory in the context of environmentalism. This model visualises five variables (values, beliefs in the new environmental paradigm (NEP), awareness of adverse consequences (AC), and ascription of responsibility to self (AR), and personal norms) in the first three stages of the VBN theory, leading to behaviour which is the fourth and final stage.

Figure 1 A schematic representation of variables in the VBN theory of environmentalism (Stern, 2000, pp. 412)

As shown in figure 1 above, the model is very extensive with multiple phases. Since the authors seek to find a construct whether to explain if the individuals see themselves as part of the problem and solution, not all these phases are relevant. As explained, this thesis focuses on how individuals explain their intentions and behaviour. AC and AR are the best fitting constructs for this research, therefore the focus will be on these two. The AC of certain behaviour on valued objects emphasises threats on individuals’ values. To rephrase it; individuals that value others’ well-being will be concerned with the environmental impact that threatens the well-being of the other (Stern, 2000). Secondly, AR refers to the perceived responsibility to reduce a threat: there is a belief or a denial by the individual that their actions have or can contribute to the consequences. In other words, it emphasises t he beliefs about being responsible, or the ability to understand the threats to the valued objects (Stern et al, 1999). These two constructs can help explore two possible reasons for an intention-behaviour gap: not being fully aware of the negative consequences of meat consumption and that they might not feel that they can make a difference or do not feel responsible for the problem. According to the full VBN theory, the AC and AR are a result of the individuals’ values and will develop into pro-environmental personal norms and eventually behaviour, making it suitable in the context of the intention -behaviour gap.

(16)

11

The VBN theory is a popular study among researchers and is widely used in terms of sustainable behaviour. Ghazali et al. (2019) used the VBN theory to explore the multidimensional structure of pro-environmental behaviour among two ethics groups in Malaysia. Their study extends the VBN theory with social norms to predict pro-environmental behaviours. Ghazali et al. (2019) suggested that the social norms predict each type of pro-environmental behaviour, which is in contrast to other constructs of the VBN theory. Another study, by Jansson et al. (2011), uses the VBN theory to get a better understanding of consumer adoption of a high involvement eco-innovation, using alternative fuel vehicles as an example. They observed from the results that the VBN theory was successful in their study. Recently, the VBN theory was used to get an understanding of meat consumption among consumers. Hoeksma et al. (2017) investigated the determinants of consumers’ intention to purchase meat from slaughter units (MSU), using the theory of planned behaviour in combination with the VBN theory to guide their quantitative research. The VBN theory helped to explain an immense proportion of the variance of the consumers’ intention to buy MSU meat. The support was found by the causal chain of this theory. Results showed that when other variables further up in the chain were added, the percentage of explained variance increased, which is in line with both of the studies from Stern (1999; 2000). Lai et al. (2020) did not limit their studies to environmental concerns but expanded this with the health concerns of individuals towards meat consumption. Their research aims to verify the role of key socio-psychological dimensions on meat intake with the help of an extended version of the VBN theory including social norms. The study of Lai et al. (2020) underlines the importance to address the health and environmental concerns of an individual’s dietary choices when holding an intervention. They also conclude that there is a substantial lack of studies testing the VBN theory for food choices, especially for meat consumption, which is indirectly related to meat substitutes. The abovementioned studies, mainly focus on the VBN theory as a whole, but a 2014 study by Juvan and Dolnicar did isolate the AC and AR constructs. They used this to successfully explain the intention-behaviour gap of sustainable tourism, which is why it is assumed that these constructs can also be relevant for the thesis as before.

It can be argued that this theory is not a perfect fit for the intention-behaviour gap in meat substitute consumption, since the VBN theory of environmentalism focuses on the context of environ mentalism, and that the environment is not the main reason for intentions of meat substitute consumption. However, environmental concerns are strongly linked to the reduction of meat consumption and meat substitute consumption studies; the literature review on this topic identified that most articles in this field talks about the environmental links. Also, the VBN model has been used before in the context of health concerns (Lai et al., 2020) and it has been argued that AC can be seen in the context of animal welfare (Christensen et al., 2007); two other important drivers for the intention of meat substitute consumption. Given these facts, it can be concluded that it is an appropriate and helpful theory to form the theoretical basis for this thesis.

(17)

12 2.2.3 Attribution Theory

The Attribution theory comes from social phycology and seeks to explain the way individuals explain the causes of their and others’ behaviour and events. Making this theory relevant in the theoretical context of this thesis in the causes individuals blame to why the intention -behaviour gap exists. Fritz Heider is considered to be the founder of this theory; first suggesting it in his 1920's dissertation, and later publishing a book on it. Heider (1985) suggests two fundamentally different ways in which individuals do this; external attribution and internal attribution. First external attribution: which gives the external environment as the cause of an individuals’ behaviour, this also refers to as situational attribution (Ryan & Connel, 1989). An example of this is when someone's car tire is punctured while driving, they can attribute this event to the poor conditions of the road; people see reasons that are not related to them as the cause of the event (Heider, 1985). When interpreting internal characteristics as the cause of behaviour or events instead of outside forces, we refer to it as internal attribution or dispositional or personal attribution. Giving the same example or the punctured car tire; seeing it as a result of their bad driving instead of a hole in the road would be internal attribution; the individual sees themself as the cause (Heider, 1985). Even though being a social phycology theory, variants of the attribution theory are often used as a theory to analyse causal attributions made by consumers and the interpretation of marketing communication. For instance, to explain consumers’ responses to negative word-of-mouth communications concerning brand consideration (Laczinak et al., 2001) or to measure advertising effectiveness (Sparkman & Lacander, 1980). Mizerski et al. (1979) made a review of the attribution theory to understand the decision -making process of the consumer and the role of the attribution theory. He argued that the attribution theory is not just a single theory, but that it is related to several theories that provide a common approach. Therefore, this theory can be used in a wide range of consumer situations. Also, Folkes (1988) made a review about the attribution theory, firstly he noted that he assumed the theory had little impact on the field of consu mer behaviour. However, he found out that the attribution theory in the studies he investigated did not use the full potential of the theory. And therefore, he stated that the aforementioned assumption that the theory has little to offer is not true.

Schmitt, (2015) argued that there are two main models in the attribution theory based on the main theory proposed by Heider. Both of which with distinct differences and applications, hereby agree with the aforementioned statement of Mizerski et al. (1979) that the attribution theory is not just a single theory but has multiple derivatives. Kelley's model (1973) is one of these, he proposes that there are not two but three different causes one can attribute an individual's behaviour to; the person itself, th e "entity” (being the stimulus), and the “time” (being the circumstances of the moment. The second main model identified by Schmitt (2015) is Weiner's model. This model studies how individuals explain their successes and failures. He identified two “dimensions” in which people do this. First, the “locus of causality”, referring to the origin of the cause, which can be both internal- or external attribution.

(18)

13

Secondly, “stability”, which defines the causes of constancy: stable or unstable referring to the likelihood of being recurrent or not (Weiner et al., 1971; Weiner et al., 1976). There are two main differences between the two models, one being the fact that most of the studies based on Kelley's model look at the way people attribute causes to other people's behaviour, while Weiner's studies on the other hand look at how individuals seek and explain causes for their behaviour. Moreover, where Kelley's model focusses on the psychological process of the attribution itself, Weiner's model focusses more on the possible consequences of the attribution; if an individual attributes the failure of success to internal or external factors, what does that mean for the behaviour in the future for the same task (Martinko & Tomson, 1998). Taking this into account, we expect Weiner's model on the attribution theory to be more fitting for this study since it has the purpose to explore how the participants of the study feel about their intention-behaviour gap, and how they rationalize or explain their behaviour not matching t heir intentions.

This literature review did not reveal a study using the attribution theory to explain meat consumption or meat substitute consumption. However, it did identify one study successfully using the attribution theory as a base to explain the attitude-behaviour gap in the context of environmentally sustainable tourism (Juvan & Dolnicar, 2014). They argued the potential to use this theory as a basis for investigating the intention-behaviour gap since it offers one possible explanation for it; “... the fact that people simply do not see themselves to be the cause of the problem, and therefore do not see behavioural change on their part to be part of the solution.” (pp. 78). Based on all the given information, it can be expected that the attribution theory could be a fitting theory to be part of the context in which this study will be conducted.

2.3 Connection of Research Concepts & Theories

The review of the above-mentioned existing literature and theories have identified several reasons participants can use to explain their intention and behaviour, as well as the gap, in the context of meat substitute consumption. Namely; the fact that meat consumption is Natural, Normal, Necessarily or Nice based on the four N-model (Joy 2010; Piazza et al., 2015), awareness of adverse consequences and ascription of responsibility to self, based on the VBN theory of environmentalism (Stern et al., 1999; Stern, 2000), and internal and external attributes of the attribution theory (Heider, 1985; Weiner et al., 1971; Weiner et al., 1976). In figure 2a visual representation can be found -of how these theories come together in exploring how individuals explain their intention, behaviour, and gap. However, this model is not created to test, or strictly follow, but is only used to give context in the data gathering.

(19)

14

Figure 2 Visual representation of the connection of theories

These theoretical categories will not be imposed on the participants and the coding and analysis of the empirical data will be done without much guidance from the theory. Therefore, it is not a given fact that any of these explanations offered by the theories will be the actual results of the research. However, the researchers are using the theories as context, so the results of the empirical data will be influenced by them to a small extent.

(20)

15

3. Research Methodology

_________________________________________________________________________________ This chapter will elaborate on the justification and motivation of the applied method of this thesis, in the context of methodology and data collection. Moreover, the method of data analysis will be argued for and the research quality will be justified.

___________________________________________________________________________

3.1 Philosophy of Research

The philosophical underlying ideas and arguments in research are a highly valuable base for later choices in the research strategy and methods. (Saunders et al., 2009). Especially in the field of business research, there is an importance in being aware of the philosophical commitments that are made, in developing the research strategy because of the significant impact the underlying understanding of the topic has (Johson & Clark, 2006). The research onion proposed by Saunders et al. (2009) with six layers, can be simplified into three different areas choices can be made. The outer two layers of the research onion refer to the philosophical choices that must be made for a study. These philosophical choices consist of five possible research philosophies and two (or three) different research approaches.

Starting with the research philosophy. Saunders et al. (2009) stated that there are four main philosophies within the field of business and management being positivism, (critical) realism, interpretivism, and pragmatism. In a later edition of the same book, they added a fifth research philosophy; post -modernism (Saunders et al., 2016). Each of these five research philosophies make three types of assumptions: ontological, epistemological, or axiological position. Ontology concerns the assumptions about the nature of reality or being, epistemology looks at what constitutes acceptable knowledge, and finally, axiology focuses on the role of values (Saunders et al., 2016). Positivism is a dominant philosophy in many research fields, this positivistic view is associated with being objective instead of subjective and working with an observable social reality to produce law-like generalisations. The main goal is establishing these generalisations like rules or laws and for these reliable facts are required (Saunders et al., 2016). With this objective underlying nature, a positivistic perspective is often associated with quantitative studies with data represented by numbers, like lab experiments or surveys (Malhotra & Birks, 2007). However, the study for this thesis rather explores multiple subjective views: looking for insights in a complex context with multiple meanings, interpretations, and realities. The intention, behaviour, and gap in meat substitute consumption and the explanation of the participants of this gap will be explored. This makes interpretivism (seen as the counterpart of positivism) a more fit ting philosophy for this study. Small samples, in-depth investigations, and a qualitative nature of data analysis are characteristics that are often matched to research with interpretive nature. There is a strong focus on taking the complexity, richness, and multiple interpretations and meaning-making into account

(21)

16

(Saunders et al., 2016). This makes interpretivism explicitly subjective; the data is open for a range of different interpretations. An evolving nature is often acknowledged where the researchers are often actively engaged in the research (e.g. personally conducted interviews). These characteristics are represented in this thesis, making the interpretive perspective a fitting research philosophy for this study. The interpretive approach is often linked to the postmodernism perspective, which was added to the main research philosophies in later editions of Saunders’ et al. book on “Research methods for business students”. Postmodernism is the more liberal and inclusive counterpart of the modernist perspective. Where the social and cultural context is an important aspect in interpretivism, postmodernism focuses even more on the processes of culture, like language and power relations, with big importance in image and symbolism (Rubin & Rubin, 2011). Also, postmodernists have strong critiques on the positivistic view, even more so than interpretivists. For instance, they do not believe that any sense of order can be definite or valid, but that it can only be provided through language with classification and categories (Chia, 2003). Although some of these characteristics of postmodernism do fit with this study, they are often a bit more extreme. For instance, this thesis does take the cultural context into account but is not the main focus of the study. Therefore, is the interpretive perspective a better fit.

The research approach reflects the use of theory. There are two main approaches: the deductive- and inductive approach. Simply put, where the inductive approach involves the actual development of a theory the deductive approach tests a theory. A deductive line of arguing is also referred to as top-down reasoning, hereby the researcher starts with a theory or perspective, and checks if it corresponds with reality. On the other hand, is the inductive line of arguing often referred to as bottom-up reasoning, starting with the making of observations, and from here make a conclusion and propose a law, theory, or proposition (Saunders et al., 2009). However, often research papers are a combination of the two, which is linked to the third approach, abduction. With the abductive approach, a phenomenon is explored by identifying themes and patterns, often interpreted as a middle ground between inductive and deductive (Saunders et al., 2016). For this thesis, the phenomenon of the intention-behaviour gap in meat substitute consumption will be explored, as well as the explanation participants give to their intention, behaviour, and potential gap. With the exploratory nature, there is not one set theory identified to test it. But data will be analysed, guided by theory to give context, to better understand the phenomenon. This shows an influence of the inductive approach with theory only used to give context. Part of the data that will be analysed; the interviews, is collected based on a theoretical framework, in addition to more open-ended questions. This suggests some influences of a deductive method. However, in the process of coding, there are no pre-identified codes based on theory, as normally used with the deductive approach. But the empirical data is used to identify codes based on similarities in the data, suggesting influences from the inductive approach. Moreover, the analysis of the receipts is done without theoretical context, suggesting a fully inductive approach for this part of the study. These

(22)

17

independently identified codes will be linked to the theory found in chapter 2. Based on this analysis, new theoretical concepts will be identified, and where possible supported by newly found theories, suggesting the inductive approach. It should be noted that research is rarely completely one or the other, but often to some extent influenced by both approaches. It can be concluded that this thesis shows elements strongly influenced by the abductive and inductive approach, with some similarities to the deductive line of arguing: using existing theories as context, while collecting, interpreting, and identifying patterns in new data.

3.2 Research Design

The design of this research can be seen as guidance to answer the question of this thesis, the way to turn the question into respected research (Robson, 2011). Therefore, the following layer of the union will be discovered: the research design choices. This simplified second layer of the union includes methodological choices, research strategies, and the time horizons from the original model of Saunders et al. (2009).

The design of this research will be based on exploratory purposes since the aim of this study is to gain deeper insights and knowledge of missing data in the field of meat substitutes. Exploratory research is mostly used when studying a new phenomenon or to capture concrete and powerful information (Sekaran & Bougie, 2016). In this thesis, the phenomenon of the intention-behaviour gap in meat substitute will be given a new and relevant deepening by studying the explanation participants give for their intention, behaviour, and this gap. It should be noted that the purpose is in fact exploratory, even though the word explaining might suggest explanatorily. However, the explanation participants give will be explored, with the aim to explore the phenomenon, not explain it. Mostly open questions are asked to get an in-depth insight into the phenomenon, this approach also allows being flexible and adaptable to changes. However, conducting exploratory research has the risk to be forced to change the initial direction when new results and insights occur (Saunders et al., 2016). There are two main ways to conduct exploratory research, divided into the options to collect data: numeric data and non-numeric data. Non-numeric data belongs to qualitative research which can collect images, words, video clips, and other similar material (Saunders et al., 2016).

Qualitative research puts its focus on the experiences of people and the meaning they give to events, structures, and processes of their natural social settings (Skinner et al., 2000). This gives a holistic insight through the participants' eyes, with their perceptions and words and how they understand, clarify and act within such situations (Miles & Huberman, 1994). This data is open for interpretation and often subjective, matching the interpretive nature of the study. Qualitative research focuses on data that comes from events that occur naturally, whereby researchers can see the “real life” approach (Skinner et al., 2000). Qualitative research occurs when there is a need to understand certain behaviour of individuals

(23)

18

in a particular context (Babin & Zikmund, 2016). For this research, an understanding of intentions, behaviour, and a gap is needed, therefore choosing qualitative research. In qualitative exploratory research mostly in-depth interviews, focus groups, and observations are used (Sekaran & Bougie, 2016). This study contains an observation of receipts and semi-structured interviews, which are developed using the theoretical background as context. The observations are used as a base to identify the actual behaviour. During the semi-structured interview, between both researchers and one participant (Babin & Zikmund, 2016), the participants will explain their intentions and behaviour, and the potential gap. This approach is chosen to avoid potential biases.

Studies can be longitudinal or cross-sectional, a longitudinal study allows to capture change and development during the research. However, this thesis has not enough time to conduct a longitudinal study. Therefore, a cross-sectional study is chosen, also known as the “snapshot”. This means that the study involves a particular phenomenon at a set time (Saunders et al., 2016). Participants will have two weeks to collect their grocery receipts. After that, the researchers will take a week to conduct the semi-structured interviews.

3.3 Data Collection

3.3.1 Observations Receipts

As part of the data collection, participants are asked to collect all grocery-related receipts for a period of two weeks. This includes receipts from grocery stores but also specialty stores like bakeries, butchers, vegetable stores, or markets. In addition, they are asked to provide receipts or lists of food eaten out or ordered as well. The observation of a document, like receipts, is used to provide elicit meaning, gain a deeper understanding, and develop knowledge (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). By collecting data on shopping and therefore consumer habits by receipts, the element of subjectivity in documenting their habits by the participants is eliminated. Making these documents and their observations purely objective. The receipts will be used to observe the actual behaviour of the participants. Later, these observations can be used during the interviews for participants to explain this behaviour compared to the intentions to explore the gap. This method of research is more often used in combination with other qualitative research methods, like in this thesis, this can be called triangulation (Denzin, 1970). The decision was made to mainly focus on receipts to measure behaviour, and interviews to measure intention as well as exploring how participants explain themselves. Other methods were explored, like adding a third step or grocery lists to explore intention as well. However, because the study focusses how on participants think about intentions and explain themselves, this was not considered to add value to the study. Since the grocery lists do not reveal any thought on intentions but only foreshadow behaviour.

(24)

19

To ensure the privacy of the participants, they can erase the prices and total amount of the products on the receipt. Moreover, all the information will be treated confidentially. If one participant loses or forgets a receipt, they are asked to make a detailed list of what they have bought. If this happened too often, their data will be considered invalid, and will not be used for the study.

3.3.2 Semi-Structured Interviews

An interview is conducted between a research respondent and a professional researcher (Babin & Zikmund, 2016). According to Malhotra and Birks (2007), in-depth interviews are an appropriate method for studies that seek to uncover feelings, beliefs, attitudes, and opinions on a specific subject. In-depth interviews will be a fitting method to explore how participants explain their intention, behaviour, and potential gap. With in-depth interviews, researchers often adopt an unstructured or structured way of interviewing (Saunders et al., 2009). For this thesis, the researchers will opt for a semi-structured approach. To cover all aspects of the purpose and complexity of the context, some structure is necessary to ensure the completeness of the data. A big advantage of interviews is that researchers are able to explore emotional unconsciousness and can go beyond initial reactions. However, it might be difficult to analyse and interpret the data, since there might be hidden interpretations and messages in how a participant expresses themselves (Malhotra et al., 2017). Therefore, flexibility is also required to explore and probe the intention, behaviour, and assumed gap more deeply, finding the true meaning. To do so, probing questions will be used to motivate and facilitate the participants to express themselves more clearly and making the interpretation of the answers potentially more correct. Probing questions are seen as an important aspect in interpretative studies (Malhotra & Birks, 2007). During semi-structured interviews, the researcher has a list of themes and some key questions. However, the order is not specific and depends on the flow of the interview, new questions can be formed during the interview to get a deeper understanding of the given answers, fitting the semi-structured nature. Focus groups have similar advances for a study to interviews. However, for this thesis, it can be argued that one-on-one interviews are more appropriate. With an interview the researchers can build a bond of mutual trust with the participants, making it more likely for the answers to be reliable. Moreover, participants are more likely to be vulnerable in admitting shortcomings in their intentions or behaviour compared to their intentions, without the social pressure of a group setting (Parker & Tritter, 2007).

3.3.3 Sample Selection

Sampling is involved in any procedure that draws a conclusion based on the measurements of a part of the population (Babin & Zikmund, 2016). The use of sampling m akes it more possible for researchers to gain a higher accuracy than a census, according to Barnett (2002). He also argues that the smaller the number of the sample, the more time researchers can spend on the method design and the means of collecting the data. In exploratory research a non-probability sampling is often used, providing a wide range of techniques to select samples based on subjective judgment (Saunders et al., 2016). The

(25)

20

sampling criteria for this thesis are households with elementary school children residing in the Netherlands. This choice is made based on convenience for the researchers and the fact that the Netherlands a frontrunning country of the flexitarian diet, therefore more willing to consume meat substitutes (Van de Pas, 2020).

3.3.4 Sample Size

It is important to take the nature of the study into account, when setting the sample size. For a study with an interpretive perspective, the goal is to explore a deeper understanding from the participants’ perspective. Together with the qualitative research design, a smaller sample size is fitting for this study. For a qualitative study, there are no set rules of a sample size, but it is suggested that the sample size should be just big enough to reach saturation (Saunders et al., 2016). However, Williams and Morrow (2009) argue that definite saturation can never be reached in interview studies since every interview is unique. Therefore, many scholars state that you should aim for a sample size when no more surprising variations occur. It is often argued that with a sample size of 12, no more surprising new themes will emerge (Saunders et al., 2016; Braun & Clarke, 2013; Guest et al., 2006; Fugard & Potts, 2015). It is recommended that when at the 12th interview new themes do emerge, few more interviews are needed. However, because of the research design participants are required to collect two weeks ' worth of food receipts before participating in the interview, last-minute extra interviews are not possible with the time limitations of the thesis. Therefore, the researchers will aim at 18 households to collect the receipts. This way it is expected that at least more than 12 participants will succeed in collecting them completely to be interviewed. This way, when surprising variations still occur at 12 interviews, there are still back-up participants that can be interviewed. Finally, in actuality, 15 of the 18 households collected the receipts correctly. After 11 interviews the researchers concluded that a sufficient level of saturation was met. However, to ensure this, all 15 households were interviewed and used for the empirical data.

3.3.5 Sampling Technique

For this study, non-probability sampling is adopted, this method relies on the researchers and their judgment in selecting participants rather than on chance (Malhotra & Birks, 2007). Non -probability sampling is often used in studies with an exploratory nature and qualitative analysis, like this thesis. There are several different techniques for non-probability sampling. Because of the limitations in resources for this thesis (both financial- and time-related), convenience sampling or self-selection are the best fitting strategies. There are a few limitations related to both techniques of sampling, mainly the low likelihood of the sample being representative. However, the goal of this study is not to have generalizable results minimizing the effect of this risk. Convenience sampling is more fitting for research where there is very little variation in the population, which is not necessarily the case in this thesis. Self-selection would be more fitting, especially with the exploratory nature of the research (Patton, 2002). For self-selection sampling, it is important to allow each case to identify their desire to

(26)

21

take part in the research. Therefore, the researchers will publicise their need for cases by asking members of the population to take part, the data will be collected from those who respond (Saunders et al., 2009). The researchers will publicise the need for cases in their network and expand this network by utilizing the network of others.

3.3.6 Execution of Data Collection

After the selection of the research participants, the selected participants got a short introduction of the study without any details and information on the topic. The researchers ensured that the selected participant was the main decision-maker of the family, regarding the grocery shopping and food intake. In the case of mutual decision-making, a solution will be found. After the information prep, the participants received instructions to collect all of their receipts from grocery- and specialty food stores, as well as eating out or ordering food. The selected participants will participate in a follow-up interview after they handed in their receipts, the date will be set within two weeks after the researchers received the receipts. Since the information given about the study is very limited, the participants have no knowledge of the intention of the research regarding meat substitutes, to limit a social desirability bias.

The study was carried out in 15 households in the Netherlands, collecting the two weeks of receipts in March 2021. The choice for a two-week implementation was made since it is expected that true behaviour will present in this period and coincidental behaviour will be eliminated (Jacelon & Imperio, 2005). The participants could start individually with the receipt collection after they received the instruction were asked to start when they purchased their first groceries from the starting date. This, to avoid falsifications through unusual behaviour that does not match with their normal grocery shopping habits. The researchers are aware of the engagement and time consumption of collecting receipts for two weeks, with the risks of incomplete or unfinished collection. After reviewing a wide range of possibilities to gain insights into grocery and food consumption behaviour, few documentation methods were considered. The documentation of every meal and ingredients was too tedious as well as listing all purchases, which is why the decision is made to collect the receipts of all groceries and take-out food. By reducing the workload for the participant, the risk of abandonment of the participants is minimised (Hunter et al., 2006).

After finishing the two-week receipt collection, the food-decision-maker of the household will have their scheduled follow-up interview. Due to the recommended social distancing regarding Covid, the interviews will be held online. This comes with some limitations, such as it being less personal and the fact that non-verbal social cues and context are harder to be picked up than in person. To try and reduce these limitations and to capture the interviews properly, they will be audio recorded. This will ensure unbiased documentation of the data, that can later be reviewed (Saunders et al, 2016). On top of this, both researchers will be present at the interviews. One will focus on asking the question and probing

(27)

22

questions and the participants' answers, the other researcher will focus on the non-verbal cues and take notes of these. All participants will be asked to give their consent for recording them, if someone will not give their consent, the second researcher will also have to take notes of the verbal communication. On top of giving consent for an audio recording, all participants are guaranteed anonymity, and that all information collected with the receipts and interviews will only be used for this study. Regarding the language of the interviews, all interviews were conducted in Dutch, so that the participants could express themselves in their native language. The transcribing and coding of the interviews are done in Dutch as well, to ensure meaning and nuances were not lost in translation. After the process of coding, all codes and meanings are translated into English.

For this study fifteen, approximately 30-minute interviews were conducted based on the interview guide that can be found in appendix 1. The first draft of the interview guide was made based on th eory, after receiving all the receipts some changes were made to make the guide more relevant and a better fit. During the interviews, to create a relaxed and comfortable atmosphere for the participant, each interview will start with a few minutes of general small talk (Malhotra & Birks, 2007). After this, the first part of the interview starts with questions to get insight into the intention of meat substitute consumption. This will start with more general questions on their views of meat consumption followed by their ideas of meat substitute products. The first section of the interview will be finished with questions on the willingness to reduce meat consumption and intentions to consume meat substitutes. For the first part of the interview, the participants will not yet be aware of the purpose of the study. Limiting this knowledge will reduce socially desirable answers. To try and limit the idea the participant can have on the topic, during the first part of the interview the questions on meat (substitutes) will be alternated with not relevant questions on other aspects of grocery shopping, and consumption as can be seen in the interview guide. When a clear view of the intentions is assessed, the second part of the interview will start. In this part, the behaviour based on the receipts will be introduced. The participant gets the opportunity to explain their intentions, behaviour, and potential gap. In this part, the probing questions are even more important to explore the reasoning and justification the participants give for the disconnect in intention and behaviour.

3.4 Data Analysis

As before mentioned, a qualitative, interpretive approach is used for this thesis. The characteristics and qualities of this approach are considered when conduction the analysis using the generic process suggested by Malhotra & Birks (2007). The first step of the analysis process involves gathering the data from the various sources (Malhotra & Birks, 2007); the collected receipts, audio recordings, transcripts of the interviews, and the notes on non-verbal cues. This will be followed by the step of data reduction; in this phase, the researchers will structure the data. Starting with the receipts, these are all checked for meat and meat substitute products. These are listed in an excel sheet, including quantities, and the

&quot;Why we (do not) substitute meat&quot; : Exploring how households with elementary school children explain their intentions and behaviour (gap) regarding meat substitute consumption.

“Why we (do not)

substitute meat

”

Exploring how households with elementary school

children explain their intentions and behaviour (gap)

regarding meat substitute consumption.

Master Thesis in Business Administration

Title:

“Why we (do not) substitute meat”

Authors:

D. E. Vreeburg and R. M. de Regt

Tutor:

Tomas Müllern

Date:

2021-05-24

Key terms: Intention-behaviour gap, meat substitutes, meat consumption, self-explaining,

qualitative.

Abstract

Acknowledgements

Table of Contents

Figures

Tables

Appendix

1. Introduction

___________________________________________________________________________

1.1 Background; Meat Consumption and the Need for Change?

1.2 Problem Definition

1.3 Research Purpose

2. Theoretical Frame of Reference

___________________________________________________________________________

2.1 Meat (Substitute) Consumption

2.2 Intention-Behaviour Gap

2.3 Connection of Research Concepts & Theories

3. Research Methodology

___________________________________________________________________________

3.1 Philosophy of Research

3.2 Research Design

3.3 Data Collection

3.4 Data Analysis

"Why we (do not) substitute meat" : Exploring how households with elementary school children explain their intentions and behaviour (gap) regarding meat substitute consumption.