Children Value Animals More Than Adults Do: A Conceptual Replication and Extension

Recent psychological research finds that U.S. American children have a weaker tendency than U.S. American adults to value humans more than animals. We aimed to conceptually replicate and extend this finding in a preregistered study (N = 412). We investigated whether 6- to 9-year-old Polish children (Study 1a) are less likely to prioritize humans over animals than Polish adults are (Studies 1b and 1c). We presented participants with moral dilemmas where they had to prioritize either humans or animals (dogs or chimpanzees) in situations that involved harming (i.e., a trolley problem) or benefiting (i.e., giving a snack). We found that Polish children prioritized humans over animals less than Polish adults did. This was the case both in dilemmas that involved preventing harm and in dilemmas that involved providing snacks. Both children and adults prioritized humans over chimpanzees more than humans over dogs.

Why don't politicians talk about meat? The political psychology of human-animal relations in elections

Building on literature from political science and psychology, I argue that political attention on animals and animal-friendly political candidates cause voter backlash. I test this using two different kinds of experiments with large, representative samples. I ask respondents to consider political candidates running for office in a U.S. presidential primary context. I find that, overall, political attention on the need to reduce meat consumption for environmental reasons caused voter backlash compared to both a control condition and attention on the need to reduce reliance on gasoline-powered vehicles (also for environmental reasons). But, the heterogeneous effects of partisan identification were strong: voter backlash was mainly driven by Republicans and Democrats were neutral. Surprisingly, candidates who put attention on farm animal rights during elections faced no voter backlash from Republicans or Democrats. Animal-friendly candidates, particularly Black women and Latinas, with attributes that demonstrate personal concern for farm animals and strong support for animal rights generally fared very well in elections, receiving large boosts in voter support. This work launches a research agenda in political psychology that "brings the animal in" to politics.

Animal Welfare Science: Why and for Whom?

There are, in the literature, distinct ways to approach animal welfare. The objective of this work was to study the value attributed to farm animals in the scientific papers published in animal welfare and animal production journals at three different points in time, separated by a decade each. The first ten papers mentioning "animal welfare" or "animal well-being" in their objectives or hypotheses from each journal and each focus year were selected. The 180 papers were blindly scored by five assessors between 1 and 10, according to the degree of intrinsic value attributed to animals. The overall mean score and standard deviation were 5.60 ± 2.49, with 6.46 ± 2.29 and 4.74 ± 2.40 for AW and AP journals, respectively, and 5.37 ± 2.44, 5.68 ± 2.52 and 5.75 ± 2.41 for the focus years of 2000, 2010 and 2020, respectively. There was an interaction between focus year and publication area: papers from AW journals scored better over time, in contrast with papers from AP journals, for which scores remained similar over decades. The inter-assessor agreement is moderate, which may reflect the subject complexity, as the language used in the papers studied was ambiguous in relation to why and for whom it is performed. The low overall mean score evidenced that the animal welfare scientific publications are, on average, not prioritizing the interests of the animals. Thus, our results evidenced the presence of animal welfarism in animal welfare science, a problem that seems not to be intrinsic to animal welfare science itself, but rather to the way research is frequently conceived, conducted, interpreted, summarized and applied. Therefore, it seems urgent to further study the motivation for animal welfare research. The statement of the main justification for animal welfare papers, with an explicit declaration of the motivational priorities that constitute each scientific animal welfare study, may be an interesting recommendation for the improvement of animal welfare science.

Changing minds about minds: Evidence that people are too sceptical about animal sentience

Our relationships with other animals are governed by how we view their capacity for sentience and suffering. However, there is currently little agreement as to whether people's beliefs about animal minds are largely accurate or inaccurate. We used an innovative task to examine how people update their beliefs in response to noisy but informative clues about animal minds. This allowed us to compare participants' posterior beliefs to what a normative participant ought to believe if they conform to Bayes' theorem. Five studies (four pre-registered; n = 2417) found that participants shifted their beliefs too far in response to clues that suggested animals do not have minds (i.e., overshooting what a normative participant ought to believe), but not far enough in response to clues that suggested animals have minds (i.e., falling short of what a normative participant ought to believe). A final study demonstrated that this effect was attenuated when humans were the targets of belief. The findings demonstrate that people underestimate animal minds in a way that can be said to be inaccurate and highlight the role of belief updating in downplaying evidence of animal minds. The findings are discussed in relation to speciesist beliefs about the supremacy of humans over animals.

Toward more equal and mutual human-pet relations: Insights and possible solutions based on social psychological theories

Human-pet relations are imbued with power imbalances, with many pets depending on humans for food and water, shelter, health care, and sheer survival. A majority of people report loving their pets and consider them to be integral family members; however, the care provided to pets varies widely and can be, in some cases, suboptimal. Yet, building more equal relations between humans and their pets could provide benefits to both parties. To achieve this increased equality and mutuality, the current paper proposes theory-based solutions. Specifically, and building on established social psychological theories, namely theories of intergroup relations and of human motivation, the current paper identifies both social and relational factors which, if socially and individually promoted, could trigger more equal and possibly mutually beneficial relationships with pets. We provide concrete examples illustrating how these factors can be maximized and promoted.

Intergroup attitudes between meat-eaters and meat-avoiders: The role of dietary ingroup identification

Why might some meat-eaters and meat-avoiders express negative attitudes toward each other? We investigated intergroup attitudes and potential underpinnings of these attitudes across three different dietary groups—veg*ans (vegetarians and vegans), flexitarians (people who restrict their meat intake partially), and meat-eaters—in Turkey ( NStudy 1 = 366; NStudy 2 = 450). In both studies, veg*ans showed the greatest ingroup favouritism and reported the highest ingroup identification and perceived discrimination. Meat enjoyment, moral consideration, and perceived veg*an threat (among meat-eaters) predicted dietary ingroup identification in Study 1, whereas perceived discrimination towards one’s dietary group was the strongest predictor of identification among all dietary groups in Study 2. Among meat-avoiders, but not among meat-eaters, stronger dietary ingroup identification was associated with more negative outgroup attitudes. Findings are discussed in light of social identity theories and intergroup perspectives.

Classic Psychedelics and Human-Animal Relations

Previous research has found associations between classic psychedelic use and nature-relatedness, but the link between classic psychedelic use and human−animal relations remains largely unexplored. Using data representative of the US adult population, with regard to age, sex and ethnicity (N = 2822), this pre-registered study assessed lifetime classic psychedelic use, ego dissolution during respondents’ most intense experience using a classic psychedelic, and three measures related to human−animal relations: speciesism, animal solidarity and desire to help animals. The results showed that lifetime classic psychedelic use was negatively associated with speciesism (β = −0.07, p = 0.002), and positively associated with animal solidarity (β = 0.04, p = 0.041), but no association was found with desire to help animals (β = 0.01, p = 0.542). Ego dissolution during the respondents’ most intense experience using a classic psychedelic was negatively associated with speciesism (β = −0.17, p < 0.001), and positively associated with animal solidarity (β = 0.18, p < 0.001) and desire to help animals (β = 0.10, p = 0.007). The findings indicate that classic psychedelics and ego dissolution may have an impact on human−animal relations. As these results cannot demonstrate causality, however, future studies should use longitudinal research designs to further explore the potential causal link between classic psychedelic use and human−animal relations.

The Early Expression of Blatant Dehumanization in Children and Its Association with Outgroup Negativity

Dehumanization is observed in adults across cultures and is thought to motivate human violence. The age of its first expression remains largely untested. This research demonstrates that diverse representations of humanness, including a novel one, readily elicit blatant dehumanization in adults (N = 482) and children (aged 5-12; N = 150). Dehumanizing responses in both age groups are associated with support for outgroup inferiority. Similar to the link previously observed in adults, dehumanization by children is associated with a willingness to punish outgroup transgressors. These findings suggest that exposure to cultural norms throughout adolescence and adulthood are not required for the development of outgroup dehumanization.

Meet your meat: The effect of imagined intergroup contact on wanting and liking of meat

Increased global meat consumption has negative impacts on animal welfare, the environment, as well as health. The current study is the first to investigate whether imagined intergroup contact with a farmed animal changes wanting and liking of beef and reduces willingness to consume meat. Collegians [N = 100, 67% female] imagined having a positive experience with either a calf (n = 36), kitten (n = 33), or child (n = 31). Following the imagined interaction, they completed the Leeds Food Preference Questionnaire to measure implicit and explicit wanting and explicit liking of beef and other types of meat relative to other food categories. Participants also indicated their willingness to reduce meat consumption. Results revealed that there were no significant differences between groups in explicit wanting or liking of beef or meat, nor in willingness to reduce future meat consumption. Nevertheless, compared to the kitten and child conditions, participants who imagined interacting with a calf experienced lower levels of implicit wanting and relative preference for beef and other meat products. Our findings suggest that imagined intergroup contact may be an effective manipulation to reduce meat consumption as a part of a broader intervention program.

Global Crisis Leadership for Disease-Induced Threats: One Health and Urbanisation

The concept of 'One Health' (OH) has gathered momentum among the public health and animal health communities as an important global policy agenda for drawing together these disciplines to inform urban planning and health security policies. OH research, from a risk governance perspective, is generally concerned with identifying preventative programmes that can minimise the threats posed by diseases at the animal-human interface (e.g. Corona virus, Ebola, avian influenza, the Q virus, for example). This article, by drawing on examples of disease threats, discusses the multi-level challenges of establishing OH with a particular focus on urban change. It considers the risks posed by the increasing urbanisation of animal habitats and what this means for achieving OH. The article concludes by discussing why social scientists need to pay greater attention to the concept of OH.