To what extent do interventions by activists that focus on creating awareness of how animals are treated have the potential to reduce the harm done to animals? A research study shows that watching a video, with the aim to increase awareness of the way animals are being treated by humans, did not affect people's speciesist attitudes or willingness to sign a petition for animal rights, although it did reduce their intentions to harm animals.
NICOLE BANACH: Why do we eat pigs, wear cows, and experiment on dogs when most people claim to love animals? Generally, people condemn animal suffering, yet they still harm animals either directly or indirectly. Humans use animals for consumption, medical studies, and entertainment. The abuse, exploitation, and mistreatment of animals relate to speciesism. Ryder define speciesism as “a prejudice or attitude of bias in favor of the interests of members of one’s own species and against those of members of other species”. This paper investigates the effectiveness of an intervention, wherein the roles of humans and animals are reversed, on people’s speciesist attitudes and behavioral intentions that are directly or indirectly harmful to animals.
To what extent do existing interventions focusing on creating awareness of how animals are treated have the potential to reduce the harm done to animals? Animal activists use various ways to create awareness of the common practices toward animals. They may contribute to changing people’s speciesist attitudes and behaviors. However, it is unclear to what extent many of these interventions are successful. One way animal activists aim to create awareness is by sharing videos with thought-provoking art showing a parallel universe wherein the roles of humans and animals are reversed. These illustrations may attract more people to watch than real videos of animal exploitation because the thought-provoking art may be less disturbing and more interesting to watch…
In two studies, participants either watched or did not watch a video showing situations in which humans take the role of nonhuman animals and vice versa. Participants’ speciesist attitudes, behavioral intentions, and behavioral responses were measured. Studies 1 and 2 showed that participants in the intervention condition more strongly intended to reduce their (in)directly harmful behavior toward animals than those in the control condition. Feelings associated with injustice mediated this effect (Study 2). There were no effects on speciesist attitude or behavioral responses. The intervention shows promise as people intended to change their behavior…
In conclusion, the results show that watching the video, with the aim to increase awareness of the way animals are being treated by humans, did not affect speciesist attitudes or people’s willingness to sign a petition for animal rights compared with those who did not watch the video. It did, though, reduce people’s intentions to harm animals. The results also provide ideas for future interventions to reduce speciesism and prevent the harming of animals. SOURCE…
RELATED VIDEOS: