https://www.selleckchem.com/products/p22077.html In many societies today, the average consumer is largely removed from the earlier stages of meat production wherein meat, in many ways, resembles an animal. The present study examined the emotional and psychological consequences of recurrent meat handling. Fifty-six individuals with commercial experience handling meat (butchers and deli workers) were contrasted with 103 individuals without such experience. Participants were presented images of meat from 3 animals-cows, sheep, and fish-that were experimentally manipulated in their degree of animal resemblance. Participants rated the images on measures of disgust, empathy for the animal, and meat-animal association. Broader beliefs and attitudes about meat and animals were also assessed. We used mixed-effect linear modeling to examine the role of time spent handling meat in participants' psychological adaptation to it. We observed significant reductions in disgust, empathy, and meat-animal association within the first year or 2 of meat handling for all types of meat. Time spent handling meat also predicted the degree to which a person defended and rationalized meat consumption and production, independent of a participant's gender and age. The findings have implications for understanding how people adapt to potentially aversive contexts such as handling animal parts. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).Reliance on disengagement strategies to manage emotional experiences is associated with higher levels of mental health symptomology. Nascent research suggests, however, that socioeconomic status (SES) may moderate the associations between emotion regulation (ER) strategy use and mental health problems. A handful of studies have been conducted assessing moderators of ER and mental health, but few have examined disengagement and all are cross-sectional. As such, little is known about whether SES influences the association between disengagement use an