anthrozoology.org

 Signal, Tania D.; Taylor, Nicola

 Anthrozoos:20, 2, June 2007 , pp. 125-130(6)

 Although a number of studies have examined a range of demographic and personality variables that may impact upon attitudes towards the treatment of non-human species, little consensus has been reached within the literature. The aim of the current study was to evaluate and assess levels of human-directed empathy and attitudes towards the treatment of animals in two diverse populations, namely the general community (n = 543) and those within the animal protection field (n = 389). Both groups of participants completed the Attitude Towards the Treatment of Animals Scale (AAS) and the Davis Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), a measure of human-directed empathy. Comparisons between the two samples indicated that those within the animal protection community scored more highly on both the animal attitude and human-directed empathy measures. Correlational analyses revealed a positive relation between AAS and IRI scores for both samples, whilst the strength of the correlation was greater for those within the animal protection sample. These findings are discussed.

Kidd, A. H., R. M. Kidd, and C. C. George.

Psychological Reports, v. 71, p. 551-557,  1992.

A. H. Kidd et al (see record 1992-34949-001) identified owners' ignorance of species-specific animal behaviors and their unrealistic expectations regarding the pet as reasons why many cats and dogs were adopted from humane societies and then rejected. The present study assessed whether better education (i.e., via their veterinarian) of prospective adopters increased retention of pets. 75 adults who had acquired new pets through a veterinarian completed a demographic questionnaire and an inventory rating the physical and emotional impact of roles pets are expected to play in their lives; 5 fathers and 26 mothers also rated the expected roles of pets in their children's lives. Follow-up phone calls after 6 mo revealed that Ss rejected significantly fewer pets and had fewer unreasonable expectations for pets' roles in their own and their children's lives than did humane society adopters from the Kidd et al study.

Landau, R. E.

Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, v. 215, p. 328-31, 1999. 

Many families seeking assistance from domestic violence agencies are known to local humane societies or animal control officials because of previous incidents of animal abuse. This is because pets are often the first victims of family disputes that erupt into violence. Analysis of domestic violence statistics indicates that veterinarians potentially treat hundreds of thousands of abused pets each year. Because veterinarians may be the first or only individuals to have access to abusive family situations, it is it important for veterinarians to be aware of potential signs of abuse of pets and their owners and to be familiar with the mechanisms for reporting suspected incidents of abuse. Thirty-one North American veterinary schools and a sample of large and small animal practitioners in Indiana were surveyed to understand to what degree current veterinary curricula prepare students to recognize abuse of animal patients and human clients and to what extent practitioners recognize and report their suspicions of abuse to appropriate authorities. The data indicate a discrepancy between beliefs about prevalence of abuse and the amount of time spent educating veterinary students to recognize and report that abuse. I hypothesize that: 1) practicing veterinarians are reluctant to report suspicions of domestic family violence directed against animals, children, or spouses for various reasons (e.g., lack of adequate training, fear of litigation, time constraints, fear that violence will escalate, belief that it is not their place to intervene, lack of contact information, fear of losing a client's business); 2) practicing veterinarians (in large and small animal practices) may not be aware that animal patients and human clients may have been abused and being unfamiliar with this diagnosis, are unfamiliar with the mechanism for reporting the abuse, especially when it involves human victims; and 3) veterinary school curricula could be modified so that veterinary students are trained to recognize human and animal abuse, thereby reducing risks to animal patients, other animals in the household, and human clients. I believe that recognition of animal and human abuse is in line with veterinarians' responsibilities to protect animal health, relieve animal suffering, and promote public health.

A. C. M. Duncan.

Journal/Aggression and Violent Behavior, 7, 2002.

This paper reviews the literature that addresses the impact of an abusive family context on childhood animal cruelty and adult violence. In the first section, literature is presented that outlines possible abusive family contextual factors associated with childhood animal cruelty and adult violence. In the second section, theories presented in the literature conjecturing about the impact of an abusive family context on childhood animal cruelty and adult violence are reviewed. Section 3 addresses the predictive validity of an abusive family context on adult violence. In the final section, assessment measures and interventions of childhood animal cruelty are discussed. Such discussion focuses on the acknowledgement of an abusive family context in the assessment and intervention of childhood animal cruelty. Overall, the literature suggests that an abusive family context may be a better predictor of adult violence than childhood animal cruelty.

Wells, D. L., and P. G. Hepper.

Applied Animal Behaviour Science, v. 61, p. 341-349, 1999.

The reactions of male and female dogs housed in an animal rescue shelter towards the presence of men and women were investigated. The response of 30 dogs housed in the Ulster Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (USPCA) to each of 3 men and 3 women, standing individually for 2 minutes at the front of the dog's cage, was observed. The amount of time that the dog spent at the front of the cage, barking, looking towards the human, wagging its tail, and engaged in activities of sitting, standing, moving, resting, was recorded. Canine gender affected the amount of time that dogs spent looking towards the humans. Female dogs showed a greater decrease in the amount of time they spent looking towards the humans over the course of the testing than male dogs. Human gender had an effect on both dog barking, and eye orientation. Dogs showed a stronger decrease in barking and tendency to look towards the human whenever the subject was a women than a man, suggesting that dogs may be more defensively-aggressive towards men than women. There was no interaction between canine and human gender on the response of the dog towards the persons. This study indicated that both canine and human gender affect certain elements in the response of a dog towards the presence of a human. The findings may have practical implications for the re-housing of dogs from rescue shelters

Lawrence, E. A.

Ethics & Behavior, v. 13, p. 203-207, 2003.

The author of the book provides useful style guidelines for countering speciesism, advising readers what language to use and what to avoid in writing about animals. A valuable feature of the book is the thesaurus designating terms to avoid and alternatives to use for each of the topics covered in the chapters. In Animal Equality, Dunayer has proved her thesis: The way we speak and write about animals is inseparable from the way we treat them. This extraordinary book is highly recommended for anyone working in the field of human-animal interactions and especially for animal rights proponents who need readily available data to support their arguments. The work is as much a guide for activists as it is a scholarly treatise. It will be especially valuable for teachers of human-animal relationships and bioethics. Scientists who write and speak about their work with animals will find it useful for gaining new understanding about the manipulation of language in their reports. The book does a service in exposing cruelties to animals that may not be generally known. In calling for honest rather than deceitful language, Dunayer has advanced the cause of animal liberation by detailing one vitally important way to help bring about more just and equitable treatment for nonhumans.