The Social and Psychological Well-Being of Vegetarians: A Focused Ethnography
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: A vegetarian is a person who refrains from eating any type of animal flesh. Research has been established on the physical health implications of adopting a vegetarian diet. However, to date, there has been no qualitative study exploring social and psychological well-being of vegetarians. Purpose: The purpose of this thesis was a) to provide a systematic review of the existing studies on the psychological well-being of vegetarians and b) to conduct original research that further explored the following: i) vegetarians’ rationales for adopting their diet, ii) their self-perceived social well-being, and, iii) their self-perceived psychological well-being. Methods: a) The systematic review involved searching several databases for primary research studies that examined the psychological well-being of vegetarians. Titles and abstracts were screened for relevance to the review and then full texts of those articles considered potentially relevant were screened. The quality of the selected studies was assessed using Health Evidence Bulletins (Wales) questions to assist with the critical appraisal of an observational study. b) After a pilot study was conducted, a focused ethnographic approach was utilized to conduct this research. Data were collected through 19 individual interviews, three focus groups, as well as a series of participant observations at several vegan- and vegetarian-association events in Alberta. Interviews and focus groups were tape recorded and transcribed verbatim, fieldnotes were taken during participant observations and materials were collected. Data were then analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Results: a) After reviewing our search for relevant articles, seven studies were identified for inclusion in this study- all of which were cross-sectional. One study had low risk and one study had moderate risk of bias (both reported poorer health in vegetarians). Five studies (with inconsistent findings) had high risk of bias. Most differences in mental health measures were small and of doubtful clinical significance. b) Individuals decided to become vegetarian for a variety of reasons including improved personal health, improved animal welfare, and reduced environmental impact through diet. Vegetarians experienced many social challenges, including being teased and dealing with unsupportive friends and family, which could pose a threat to their social well-being. However, vegetarians also experienced many psychological rewards including a sense of pride and peace of mind knowing their values aligned with their actions. Conclusion: There is little available evidence on the psychological well-being of vegetarians. Most studies have high risk of bias, and the evidence that does exist is inconsistent, although the higher quality studies suggest poorer psychological well-being among vegetarians. Further research is needed to investigate whether a causal relationship exists between vegetarianism and mental health. Individuals become vegetarian for a variety of reasons. Others may not agree with their diet choice and this can affect their self-perceived social well-being. However, the self-perceived benefits to psychological well-being associated with adopting a vegetarian diet seem to outweigh any of the perceived threats to their social well-being.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle