When watching street debates with the vegan activists Earthling Ed and Joey Carbstrong, it becomes apparent to me that one of the biggest barriers that they (and other activists) face is personality differences. This is because certain personality traits shape our receptivity to veganism. There are indeed general cognitive biases that can make some people resistant to considering and adopting a vegan lifestyle. These include the backfire effect (also known as belief perseverance), whereby evidence that contradicts someone’s belief ends up strengthening that belief, as the evidence challenges a deeply-held worldview or sense of identity.
However, in addition to the barriers of cognitive biases and defence mechanisms, vegan advocates also have to contend with the fact that variations in personality can influence how receptive someone is to arguments for ethical veganism. I previously wrote about how high sensitivity can increase the willingness to embrace veganism, but there are other personality traits that influence this kind of decision-making. Vegan activists will likely need to consider the diversity of personalities they meet, as well as their own unique makeup, in order to find an approach that is most effective. Approaches may need to be adapted and tailored depending on the kind of person they’re interacting with.
A 2016 study found that “vegans have more open and compatible personality traits, are more universalistic, empathic, and ethically oriented, and have a slightly higher quality of life when compared to vegetarians.” Of course, it’s possible that many people become more open-minded and empathic as a result of exposure to veganism (certain personality traits, including openness, can, and do, change over time). Nevertheless, this was a survey-based study, so it identified correlations, not causal relationships. Therefore, it’s also possible, and I would think likely, that pre-existing higher scores of openness and empathy make someone more likely to adopt a vegan diet.
It is understandable that scoring higher in openness would make you more open to considering new information, arguments, and lifestyles. I imagine, too, that variations in novelty seeking would affect receptivity to veganism. People vary in their levels of comfort when it comes to making changes in their lives. For some, trying out veganism does not seem like an overly drastic change, whereas someone else may see it as disruptive. A lifestyle change – because of the new habits it involves – is more easily embraced by some than others. For those who score low on novelty seeking, or who might even be neophobic (i.e. unsettled by novelty), vegan advocates may have to recommend a more gradual or step-by-step approach to adopting veganism.
In vegan advocacy, there remains a constant tension between defending an ethical position (to avoid supporting animal exploitation) and pragmatism (e.g. an understanding that to successfully stay vegan, not everyone may achieve this by becoming vegan overnight). Vegan activists often try to maintain the ethical standard of veganism while respecting practical considerations, for instance, by pointing people to vegan alternatives to all the non-vegan food they already enjoy. Whether an activist is open to a gradualist path to veganism is likely dependent on whether they are more utilitarian or deontological/Kantian in their approach to ethics, that is, whether they care about minimising suffering in the most effective way possible or sticking to moral rules and obligations, no matter what. And, interestingly, whether someone embraces utilitarian or deontological/Kantian ethics may also, to a certain degree, be influenced by personality traits. For example, someone high in conscientiousness is more likely to follow rules. Hence, in order to be effective as a vegan advocate, it may be necessary to ascertain whether someone cares more about a utilitarian or duty-based approach to ethics, and adjust arguments in favour of veganism based on that.
A 2021 study, published in Current Issues in Personality Psychology, found:
Vegans and vegetarians scored significantly higher than carnists in open-mindedness and attitude towards animals; there was no difference between scores of vegans and vegetarians. No relationship between the diet groups and demographic variables (gender, education, and age) was identified. From personality traits and sociodemo-graphic variables, only open-mindedness was a significant predictor of attitudes towards animals.
This diverges from the 2016 study, in that it discovered no difference between vegans and vegetarians in terms of open-mindedness. However, it does lend support to my earlier point that open-mindedness is a strong predictor of ethical dietary changes. If open-mindedness (and pre-existing levels of empathy) shape people’s attitudes towards non-human animals, then vegan activists may need to adjust their approach to people lower in openness and empathy.
For example, not everyone reacts in the same way to footage of how non-human animals are treated in factory farms. Some passersby in Joey Carbstrong’s videos may react in an unfazed way to the footage of animal exploitation and suffering he displays. When they respond to him that they explicitly don’t care or love the taste of meat, this may be a defence mechanism. It’s typically men making these nonchalant or jokey responses, so that could also just be a sign of trying to appear cool or maintain a masculine identity of being unemotional or tough, especially in front of other guys. This also brings into focus how gender differences, which are significantly influenced by culture, may act as an additional challenge in vegan advocacy. Men and women may respond differently to particular kinds of arguments for veganism.
Independent of gender, if people differ in their levels of empathy, then convincing people to care about the interests of non-human animals may, in some cases, require more emotion-based approaches, whereas in other cases, a more logic/rationality-based approach may be more effective. While descriptions and footage of animal suffering may fully convince one person to become vegan (based on the strong responses of empathy and compassion they elicit), they may not be sufficient for another person. Someone else might be more convinced to consider veganism, try it out, and stick with it if they are presented with undeniably rational arguments in favour of it. Of course, in the latter case, activists still need to contend with the defence mechanisms and biases that arise when people’s worldview is contradicted. In light of this, I do have a lot of respect for Earthling Ed’s approach. Since he himself doesn’t become defensive or impatient when encountering common cognitive biases, this does help to make (at least some) non-vegans less defensive and closed off to veganism.
Personality is, of course, not the only barrier to someone embracing veganism. As a 2025 survey study published in Appetite highlights:
Respondents are most willing [to change to a more plant-based diet] based on doctors’ recommendations (mean = 2.61), and if prices for plant-based products were lower (mean = 2.55), and least willing based on scientists’ and politicians’ recommendations (mean = 1.86). Regression analyses reveal that men, the baby boomer cohort, and respondents with lower levels of education have a significantly lower willingness to transition to more plant-based diets. Further, recommendations from doctors, scientists, and politicians appear to be promising interventions for addressing the dietary behavior of men and older cohorts. Interventions by doctors and lower prices for plant-based products have the highest potential to induce dietary change even among the reluctant, reducing health inequalities and promoting environmentally friendly behavior.
Nonetheless, I believe that the relationship between personality and veganism is underdiscussed, especially amongst vegan activists and vegans in general, who may find themselves bewildered that others don’t become vegan, particularly when confronted with footage of extreme animal suffering or strong moral arguments. Personality differences help explain, to a certain extent, differences in how people respond to veganism and why one message doesn’t fit all.
This article is depressing really, that having a doctor tell you that “you need it” is the #1 hope for vegans. Can you guess who contributes over 90% of funding for lobbying for animal agriculture subsidies? The pharmaceutical medical complex that trains doctors….heart disease cancer and stoke provide 87% of their incomes, and all three are directly caused by eating animal products.
#2. Is drop in price of fake animal products. Well who’s going to lobby for subsidies for that?…there’s no $ to be gained by any one. Most vegans don’t eat those any way, and those folks who do eat them are the least likely to remain a long term vegan. the biggest problem with health motivated plant based eating, is people don’t tend to remain persevering. Vegans boycott animal cruelty and I’ve never heard of one changing their mind that “it’s not so cruel after all.”
Where as plant based eaters usually do it because they hope it will help them with a disease. As a whole food plant based diet has been scientifically proven to be the healthiest diet. And people assume it’s easy to change one’s diet, but ask any dieter…it’s never as easy as it looks.
My dad cured his diabetes with a plant based diet, but he surrendered to the emotional and physical addictions to caiseomorphins in dairy and the flavor of meat, and so his diabetes returned of course, and eventually he died of it.
How many times do we know of someone who broke their diet when it was truly better for them to keep dieting?
It’s not because whole food based in abstaining from animal products does not work, it’s strangely because many need a stronger motive than health. Once a health motivated plant based eater feels better, often they loose motivation and begin eating animal products again.
But once one has seen the horrors of factory farming and slaughter with the eyes of compassion, and commits their heart to becoming vegan there’s no going back. In my 57 years vegan, lve never seen a vegan ever go back to supporting the torturing and terrified killing of animals.
Sadly both are useless options to us vegans who want to make more of a difference.
I’ve personally never converted anyone to veganism, except my vegetarian Dr. She sees my lab results come back every year and is so impressed she said she’s trying it.