logo
ResearchBunny Logo
Attitudes to animal use of named species for different purposes: effects of speciesism, individualising morality, likeability and demographic factors

Psychology

Attitudes to animal use of named species for different purposes: effects of speciesism, individualising morality, likeability and demographic factors

S. Marriott and H. J. Cassaday

This fascinating research by Sara Marriott and Helen J. Cassaday delves into society's attitudes towards animal use, revealing the complexities of speciesism and moral values. The study uncovers intriguing correlations between individual preferences and respect for animal rights, offering insights into the psychological mechanisms affecting our relationships with animals.

00:00
00:00
~3 min • Beginner • English
Abstract
Attitudes to animals and their use are becoming increasingly important for the success of conservation and environmental initiatives. Beliefs about animals, their perceived emotional appeal, as well as individuals' moral capacities are all likely drivers of attitudes to animal use. In the present study, 320 participants completed an online survey containing the animal purpose questionnaire (APQ), the likeability and the speciesism scales, along with subscales of the moral foundations questionnaire and some demographic items. The results suggest that participants were least agreeable towards the use of pet species, but more neutral towards the use of profit and pest species. Individuals with a stronger liking for animals, greater individualising moral values and fewer speciesist attitudes were more likely to challenge animal use. In addition, individuals who identified as young female and non-meat-eating displayed heightened concern about animal use. Individualising morality and speciesism, along with personal factors such as eating orientation were significant predictors of attitudes to animal use as measured by the APQ. Speciesism was the strongest individual predictor of APQ totals, accounting for the highest proportion of the variance in the hierarchical regression. Overall the findings suggest that human versus non-human animal and pet versus non-pet are the key speciesism prejudices at work. Moreover, a general measure of human respect for the rights of other humans also predicted respect for the rights of animals. Thus the findings also suggest some similarity in the psychological mechanisms underpinning human-human and human-animal relations.
Publisher
Humanities & Social Sciences Communications
Published On
Apr 20, 2022
Authors
Sara Marriott, Helen J. Cassaday
Tags
animal use
speciesism
moral values
likeability
demographics
attitudes
animal rights
Listen, Learn & Level Up
Over 10,000 hours of research content in 25+ fields, available in 12+ languages.
No more digging through PDFs, just hit play and absorb the world's latest research in your language, on your time.
listen to research audio papers with researchbunny