Should farmed animal donation appeals de-emphasize diet change - Insights from Pulse (Rethink Priorities)

Executive summary: Using Wave 2 of Rethink Priorities’ Pulse survey (≈5,600 US adults, Feb–Apr 2025), the report finds that a simple donation appeal was slightly more compelling than a “diet distancing” appeal, both messages modestly increased perceived impactfulness of donating without reducing perceived impact or interest in diet change, and neither message reliably increased a downstream “request more info” behavior.

Key points:

Wave 2 of Pulse surveyed ~5,600 US adults (Feb–Apr 2025) and analyzed results to be representative across demographics, with additional “Not active” and “Not active, sympathetic” inclusion tiers.
Respondents were randomized to Control, a Donation message, or a Diet distancing message that added “You don't have to change what you eat” and claimed donating can be “just as impactful as going fully plant-based.”
The Diet distancing message was rated slightly less compelling than the Donation message by about 0.3–0.4 points on a 1–10 scale (≈0.15 SD), though sympathetic respondents found both messages more compelling overall.
Diet change (adopting a fully plant-based diet) was rated as more difficult than donating $25/month to top charities by about one point on a 1–10 scale (≈0.3–0.4 SD), and neither message reliably changed perceived difficulty.
In the Control condition, donating and diet change were rated as equally impactful, while both messages increased the perceived impact of donating by about 0.7 points (≈0.23–0.27 SD), making donating seem more impactful than diet change without reducing perceived impact of diet change.
Reported interest was higher for donating than diet change regardless of condition (~0.7 points), both messages very slightly increased interest in donating, and the Donation message also slightly increased reported interest in diet change (≈0.3 points), with diet distancing directionally similar but smaller.