SWPS study finds a chicken’s name can change children’s meat choices

Children who learned a chicken’s name and individual habits chose less poultry in a sandwich-building experiment, researchers at SWPS University have found. But the effect depended on how much they already liked meat, and did not extend to pork.

• Two studies involved 199 Polish children aged five and six, using questions and a toy sandwich-building task.
• Presenting a chicken as a distinct individual reduced poultry selections among children without a strong liking for meat.
• The findings concern stated intentions and pretend food choices, rather than measured changes in meat consumption.

Published in Appetite, the research examined whether children’s concern for an individual animal could influence their choices about meat from other animals. Researchers Aleksandra Rabinovitch, Katarzyna Cantarero and Katarzyna Byrka also tested whether emphasizing a chicken’s uniqueness worked differently from describing it as similar to others of its species.

Across the two studies, involving 94 and 105 children respectively, identifying a chicken as a unique individual reduced poultry preferences among participants who did not report a strong liking for meat. Children who particularly enjoyed meat showed no corresponding change.

The distinction matters because the findings do not support a claim that naming farm animals will reliably persuade children to eat less meat. They suggest that individual stories can influence some children’s responses, within limits set by their existing preferences.

In the first experiment, children were shown a chicken silhouette. One group learned about a bird called Lelek, receiving information about its favorite foods and everyday habits in the yard. A comparison group received the same information without a name, presented as a general description of chickens.

Children then assembled toy sandwiches from artificial ingredients, including cheese, tomato, poultry cold cuts and pork cold cuts. The task allowed researchers to examine selections alongside children’s answers about their willingness to eat the animal.

Among children who did not strongly like meat, those introduced to the individual chicken selected fewer poultry slices. The response therefore extended beyond reluctance to eat the particular bird they had encountered in the story to choices representing meat from other chickens.

However, the experiment used pretend food. It did not establish whether children subsequently ate less poultry at home, selected different school meals or maintained those preferences over time. The paper describes the sandwich exercise as a proxy behavioral task.

The second experiment tested whether the way an animal was individualized affected the result. Children were divided into three groups. One met Chico, a chicken described as a unique individual. Another encountered a named chicken whose characteristics were presented as shared with other chickens. A control group received general information about the species.

The researchers also asked children whether they perceived the animals as unique or similar to other chickens. Presenting a distinctive individual proved more effective at reducing poultry selections than giving a chicken a name while emphasizing its similarities to the wider group.

“A key finding of the experiment concerns the role of an animal’s uniqueness. Presenting a chicken as an individual with its own name and truly distinctive traits was more effective at discouraging the choice of poultry meat than presenting a chicken that had a name but was otherwise similar to other chickens,” said Rabinovitch, a psychologist at SWPS University’s Faculty of Psychology in Sopot.

“This implies that giving an animal a name helps a child view it as a being worthy of protection, provided that the name serves to distinguish the animal as unique. This sense of uniqueness encourages children to extend their concern to other, anonymous members of the same species.”

The work builds on research into the identifiable victim effect, in which information about a particular individual can increase people’s willingness to help. Earlier research published in 2024 found that preschoolers introduced to named animals with specific preferences expressed greater interest in befriending them and less willingness to eat them.

The new studies examined whether that response extended to selections representing meat from the same species and from a different species.

The results showed a clear boundary. Learning about an individual chicken affected poultry selections under the conditions identified by the researchers, but did not affect pork preferences. Concern for one bird did not produce a general reduction in meat choices.

The researchers suggest individualized animal characters could be used in preschool education to encourage diets containing more plant-based foods. They also emphasize that attempts to change children’s diets need to account for taste preferences and habits at home. In these experiments, children with a strong liking for meat remained unaffected by the chicken’s name and story.

If you liked this, check these out...‍

• University of Exeter study found young people open to meat-free diets but struggled to stick with them

• Designing for delight: why taste, not technology, will define alternative protein’s next chapter

• EIT Food study finds consumers willing to try precision fermentation, but trust remains a hurdle