English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

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.

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