Framing Factory Farming: Using Moral Messaging to Emphasize Shared Fate of Humans and Factory Farmed Animals

Intensive animal farming, despite its economic advantages, presents a complex socio-economic challenge with significant implications for environmental sustainability, public health, and ethical concern. While existing behavioral research on moral appeals has primarily focused on harms inflicted on animals, this study takes a different approach by examining whether emphasizing the negative impacts of factory farming on human well-being can influence attitudes and behavioral intentions. Drawing on two evolutionary frameworks—the Adaptive Conservation Rule and Morality-as-Cooperation—we tested whether highlighting humancentered harms could shift perceptions of animal welfare and related behaviors. In a preregistered experiment (N = 403), participants were exposed to messages describing how factory farming disrupts different domains of cooperation, focusing on human health, labor conditions, community well-being, and environmental outcomes. We assessed moral concern for factory-farmed animals, intentions to choose more sustainable animal products, and willingness to support organizations opposing factory farming. The messages did not produce significant effects on any outcome measures. However, perceived fitness interdependence (PFI)—the extent to which individuals view their well-being as linked to that of animals—consistently predicted pro-animal and anti-factory farming outcomes. Endorsement of moral values such as Loyalty, Fairness, and Reciprocity, as well as stakeholder identity, also influenced these outcomes. These findings suggest that moral framing alone may be insufficient to shift consumer attitudes and behaviors. Instead, individual differences—particularly PFI and identity-related factors—may play a more central role in shaping responses to factory farming and should be considered in future behavioral interventions.