Abstract
Abstract
An increasing number of individuals aim to reduce their meat consumption, but implementing this is challenging. Self‐control strategies could support this change; however, their effectiveness remains understudied. This study examines whether providing self‐control strategies supports motivated individuals in reducing meat intake. Based on the process model of self‐control, we tested whether situational strategies outperform intrapsychic strategies. Additionally, we examined whether combining both strategy types is more effective than either strategy alone. We conducted an ecological momentary intervention including a baseline (Week 1), an intervention (Weeks 2–4), and a follow‐up (Week 9). Participants—156 German students who regularly consumed meat and aimed to reduce their consumption—were randomized to one of four groups: during the intervention, they received either no, intrapsychic, situational, or both strategies. Meat consumption (in grams) was measured through end‐of‐the‐day reports. Two‐part multilevel models showed that receiving strategies (vs. none) and receiving both strategy families (vs. one) increased the odds of meat‐free meals during the intervention, but did not reduce overall meat consumption. All groups meaningfully reduced meat consumption during study participation, even up to the 1‐month follow‐up. Findings challenge the key prediction of the process model and inform the design of future diary interventions.