Vegans Experience More Social Disapproval than Other Vegetarians and Pescatarians Experience Less Social Disapproval than Vegetarians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Across three studies conducted in the US and Poland, we found that vegans tended to think that others treated them more negatively because of their diet than lacto-ovo vegetarians or pescatarians. In contrast, pescatarians tended to think that other treated them less negatively than lacto-ovo vegetarians did. In one study, we found that vegans, lacto-ovo vegetarians, and pescatarians thought that others treated them more negatively because of their diet than omnivores did. Interestingly, in this same study, we found that vegans, lacto-ovo vegetarians, and pescatarians thought that others treated them more positively in some ways due to their diets than omnivores did. A third study found that differences in perceptions of negative treatment among vegans, lacto-ovo vegetarians, and pescatarians were more pronounced for how strangers treated them than they were for how friends and family members treated them. How diet influences the treatment people receive appears to vary as a function of numerous factors, and future research needs to address such questions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".