The Ethical Labeling Paradox: How the Framing of Animal Welfare Labels Influences Meat-related Cognitive Dissonance and Meat Reduction

This upload includes datasets from two studies performed for the manuscript titled "The Ethical Labeling Paradox: How the Framing of Animal Welfare Labels Influences Meat-related Cognitive Dissonance and Meat Reduction" (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2026.103027).  Study 1: This data comes from an online experiment with five conditions testing the effect of type of framing (positive, negative) and level of animal welfare (low, high) of an animal welfare label for meat. The expectation is that a positive framing can trigger dissonance via moral and social norms. Additionally, we expect that a positive frame increases denial of animal suffering and meat consumption choices. Study 2: This data comes from an online experiment with four conditions testing the effect of type of framing (positive, negative) and governmental endorsement (support, oppose). The expectation is that a negative frame (vs. positive frame) only affects dissonance and injunctive norms when the government supports the label (vs. opposes). Anonymization and Data Protection:  Both datasets have been anonymized to ensure compliance with ethical and legal data protection standards: - All identifiers are non-personal and randomly generated. - Exact age values have been grouped to reduce re-identification risk. - No personally identifiable information (e.g., names, emails, IPs) is included. - Regional data is limited to broad areas (North, South, etc.). - Comments at the end of the survey are deleted.