Veterinary education and experience shape beliefs about dog breeds. Part 2: Trust

Dog breed stereotypes are frequently used to inform people's expectations about canine behavior, despite evidence that breed is largely uninformative in predicting individual dog behavior. Further, these beliefs differ among populations. However, it remains unknown how ratings of warmth toward a breed are associated with ratings of other social behavioral domains, and whether differences exist between populations with varying experience with dogs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate ratings of trust and warmth among survey respondents including veterinary students, veterinary faculty and staff, undergraduates in animal-health related majors and members of the general public. Using an online survey, respondents rated their likelihood to trust a dog in varying scenarios for 10 different dog breeds. Additionally, respondents used a feelings thermometer to rate how warm or cool they felt towards each breed. Findings revealed differences in feelings thermometer and trust ratings across populations. All ratings were lower among the veterinary academic respondents compared to the general public and undergraduates. Veterinary students further along in their training, as well as undergraduates with clinical experience, reflected perceptions similar to those of the veterinary faculty and staff providing support for cultural transmission of beliefs during veterinary education and training.

Can Gender Nouns Influence the Stereotypes of Animals?

Educating about animals in zoos and aquariums poses daily challenges for education teams, who must not only master biological content but also possess communication skills to adapt information for diverse ages and cultures. This research consists of two sequential studies designed to investigate the impact of grammatical genders on animal stereotypes and elicited emotions. In Study 1, four animals were independently chosen based on a set of predefined conditions, which were then used in Study 2. The second study explored whether the presence of grammatical genders in the Portuguese language influenced the perceived stereotypes of four animals (panda bear, giraffe, polar bear, and cheetah) using the Stereotype Content Model framework. For comparison, English-speaking participants were also surveyed, as English lacks grammatical genders. The results demonstrated that grammatical genders influenced the perceived gender, as well as, although only slightly, the warmth, competence, and elicited emotions of some animals. All animals under study were associated with the protective stereotype, regardless of the presence of grammatical gender. This study emphasizes the significance of subtle yet crucial elements in communication, such as grammatical genders, in shaping stereotypes and innate emotional associations concerning animals.

Focusing on Social Behaviors: Improving the Perceived Warmth of Sharks in an Aquarium Setting

Sharks are commonly depicted as intentionally dangerous predators and are considered a threat by the general public, limiting support for and success of global shark conservation. Following the SCM framework, this study aimed at testing the effect of information on the social lives of sharks alone or paired with circumstantial humor on the participants' perceived warmth of sharks before visiting an aquarium. The present study took place in a naturalistic setting, allowing testing of the variables in a pseudo-real-world environment where results can objectively help in the implementation of strategies on the ground. A total sample of 303 visitors participated in this study, where three conditions (control: 100; social information: 102; social information with humor: 101) were tested. Results showed that, although mild, it was possible to affect the warmth dimension of the shark's stereotype, most likely due to the presence of information about the social lives of sharks. This information slightly leveraged the perceived warmth dimension, although still far from the less threatening stereotype as aimed. Results also highlight the possible importance of using videos within the strategic communication and education approaches in aquariums in order to be most effective in challenging the shark stereotype. Limitations and future research ideas are explored.

The Social Representations of Zoo Goers toward Crocodiles and Turtles: Structural Analysis and Implications for Conservation

Zoos have changed dramatically over the last century and today attract millions of people worldwide, being places where visitors can closely watch wildlife and learn about the species on display. Although present at most zoos, reptiles are challenging animals in terms of visitor interest and engagement, as some species do not fit aesthetic standards from the human standpoint, have culturally negative perceptions or generate aversive emotions. By studying zoo visitors’ social representations of crocodiles and turtles, we aimed to detail their structures, as well as identifying their prototypical elements that help to understand their emotional and cognitive framing. The findings show the crocodile’s prototypical image as a big, fearsome predator with teeth as its main physical attribute. Male visitors showed a more emotional perception of this animal. The turtle’s prototypical image is a slow, hard-shelled ancestral sea animal with a neutral-to-positive set of traits, with no particular differences between genders. Our results shed a more detailed light on some of the social constructs that make up the mental images of these animals, which can help the zoological community direct communication toward a more fluent conversation between stakeholders toward conservation.

Comparing emotion inferences from dogs (Canis familiaris), panins (Pan troglodytes/Pan paniscus), and humans (Homo sapiens) facial displays

Human beings are highly familiar over-learnt social targets, with similar physical facial morphology between perceiver and target. But does experience with or similarity to a social target determine whether we can accurately infer emotions from their facial displays? Here, we test this question across two studies by having human participants infer emotions from facial displays of: dogs, a highly experienced social target but with relatively dissimilar facial morphology; panins (chimpanzees/bonobos), inexperienced social targets, but close genetic relatives with a more similar facial morphology; and humans. We find that people are more accurate inferring emotions from facial displays of dogs compared to panins, though they are most accurate for human faces. However, we also find an effect of emotion, such that people vary in their ability to infer different emotional states from different species’ facial displays, with anger more accurately inferred than happiness across species, perhaps hinting at an evolutionary bias towards detecting threat. These results not only compare emotion inferences from human and animal faces but provide initial evidence that experience with a non-human animal affects inferring emotion from facial displays.

Escaping from the meat paradox: How morality and disgust affect meat-related ambivalence

Meat production and its consumption harm animals, the environment, and human health; nevertheless, many people like to eat meat. If people become aware of this so-called meat paradox, they experience an aversive cognitive conflict. People, therefore, have to eschew meat if they permanently want to resolve this conflict. Eschewing meat is demanding, however, because people have to resist their temptation to eat meat and challenge social norms. In the present research, we thus conducted two pre-registered studies to investigate how people may overcome these obstacles: We hypothesized that people may go through a hedonic shift in which they establish cognitive consistency by forming univalent instead of ambivalent attitudes and that this process is fueled by the moral emotion disgust. In Study 1, we found that veg*ans who pursued moral goals with their diet reported more disgust towards meat, which was associated with reduced meat-related ambivalence. In Study 2, we found that disgust towards meat was again associated with decreased meat-related ambivalence. That is, veg*ans and omnivores similarly reported greater disgust after reading a text describing bad hygienic conditions in meat production. Besides this physical disgust, they also experienced heightened disgust if they read a text on animal cruelty in meat production. This moral disgust, however, was only elicited in people who did not morally disengage from their harmful behavior, i.e., in people who attributed relatively high emotional and mental capacities towards animals. While the latter findings of Study 2 are rather exploratory, taken together our findings suggest that morality and disgust may indeed promote cognitive consistency. The outlined processes thus could play a pivotal role in adopting and maintaining meat-less diets.

Do dog breeds differ in pain sensitivity? Veterinarians and the public believe they do

Humans do not respond to the pain of all humans equally; physical appearance and associated group identity affect how people respond to the pain of others. Here we ask if a similar differential response occurs when humans evaluate different individuals of another species. Beliefs about pain in pet dogs (Canis familiaris) provide a powerful test, since dogs vary so much in size, shape, and color, and are often associated with behavioral stereotypes. Using an on-line survey, we asked both the general public and veterinarians to rate pain sensitivity in 28 different dog breeds, identified only by their pictures. We found that both the general public and veterinarians rated smaller dogs (i.e. based on height and weight) as being more sensitive to pain; the general public respondents rated breeds associated with breed specific legislation as having lower pain sensitivity. While there is currently no known physiological basis for such breed-level differences, over 90% of respondents from both groups indicated belief in differences in pain sensitivity among dog breeds. We discuss how these results inform theories of human social discrimination and suggest that the perception of breed-level differences in pain sensitivity may affect the recognition and management of painful conditions in dogs.

Stereotypes, emotions, and behaviors associated with animals: A causal test of the stereotype content model and BIAS map

Using the stereotype content model (SCM; Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002) and the behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes (BIAS) map (Cuddy, Fiske, & Glick, 2007), two experiments tested the effect of animal stereotypes on emotions and behavioral tendencies toward animals. As a novel approach, Study 1 ( N = 165) manipulated warmth and competence traits of a fictitious animal species (“wallons”) and tested their effect on emotions and behaviors toward those animals. Stereotypical warm-competent and cold-incompetent “wallons” elicited fondness/delight and contempt/disgust, respectively. Cold-competent “wallons” primarily elicited threat but not awe. Warm-incompetent “wallons” were elusive targets, not eliciting specific emotions. The warmth dimension determined active behaviors, promoting facilitation (support/help) and reducing harm (kill/trap). The competence dimension determined passive behaviors, eliciting facilitation (conserve/monitor) and reducing harm (ignore/let them die off). Study 2 ( N = 112) tested the relation between animal stereotypes for 25 species and realistic scenarios concerning behavioral tendencies toward animals. Similar to Study 1, stereotypically warm (vs. cold) animals matched with active scenarios, eliciting more facilitation (i.e., national health campaign) but less harm (i.e., fighting animals). Stereotypically competent (vs. incompetent) animals matched with passive scenarios, eliciting more facilitation (i.e., restricted areas) but less harm (i.e., accidental mortality). Accordingly, stereotypes limited the suitability of scenarios toward animals. Although findings are consistent with the SCM/BIAS map framework, several unpredicted results emerged. The mixed support is discussed in detail, along with the implications of an intergroup approach to animals.

The intergroup foundations of climate change justice

Climate change is a global problem that is caused by humans and must be solved by humans, and while differences exist, many theories and research on prejudice and discrimination have direct connections to the psychological processes involved in climate change. Climate change is not only a geophysical issue, but an intergroup issue with justice implications. It impacts people who are most vulnerable to environmental degradation as well as social injustices. Arguably it not only violates human rights but also the rights of animals and nature. Thus, the study of group processes and intergroup relations is critical to understanding the myriad of barriers to addressing this large-scale problem. We explore influences on cognitive steps in perceiving climate change as a justice issue, using social psychology to understand minimization of harms and responsibilities for addressing climate change, and draw from the prejudice and discrimination literature to find ways of moving forward.

Modeling Evolutionary Changes in Information Transfer

Abstract. Interspecific communication provides good opportunity for studying signal evolution. In this theoretical paper, we hypothesized that vocal signaling in dogs may show specific changes that made it more suitable for interspecific communication in the anthropogenic niche. We assumed that (1) some dog vocalizations will diverge from the corresponding exemplars of wolves; (2) they provide comprehendible affective, indexical, and contextual information for humans; (3) some aspects of dog vocalizations are more typical for the interspecific than for the intraspecific domain. We found that the most unique type of vocalization in the dog is barking. We proved that human listeners can contextually categorize dog barks, as well as attribute distinct inner states of dogs based on the barks. We found that dogs are sensitive to both contextual and individual-specific features of other dogs’ barks. However, dogs showed almost no response to the bark emitted in isolation, which is one of the easiest to recognize by humans, indicating the possibility of a specific, new communicative role for barks, not present in its original function. Our conclusion is that the qualitative and quantitative proliferation of barks can be explained by mechanisms of evolution such as ritualization and adaptive radiation. Barks became suitable for conveying a more various set of information than the original barks of wolves did. Barks also became typical in such contexts where originally they were not used – such as the contact seeking calls of isolated specimens, apparently targeted at the human, and not at a canine audience.