Questioning the Role of Empathy with Animals on the Relationship Between Speciesism and Collective Action Orientation for Animal Rights

Öz

People must attribute minds to non-human beings in order to accord them various rights and feel moral responsibility toward them. Speciesism, on the other hand, limits human moral responsibility to species membership by prioritizing the interests of human species over those of non-human species. The current study examined the role of empathy with animals on the associations of speciesism and mind attribution to animals with collective action orientation for animal rights. The sample consisted of 196 females and 103 males, whose ages ranged between 18 and 61 (MAge = 25.56, SD = 7.80). Participants were given a socio-demographic information form as well as scales of speciesism, mind attribution to animals (sensation and intellect capacity), empathy with animals, and collective action orientation for animal rights. According to the results, emotional and cognitive empathy with animals indirectly explained the link between speciesism and collective action orientation. Moreover, emotional empathy with animals also indirectly explained the relationship between perceived sensation capacity of animals and collective action orientation. The findings highlight the importance of animal empathy-related mechanisms in collective action orientation for animal rights.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• speciesism
• animal empathy
• animal rights
• collective action

Türcülük ve Hayvan Hakları İçin Kolektif Eylem Yönelimi Arasındaki İlişkide Hayvanlarla Empatinin Rolünün Sorgulanması

Öz

İnsan dışı varlıklara zihin atfetmek onlara çeşitli haklar tanınması ve insanların onlara karşı ahlaki sorumluluk hissetmesi açısından kritiktir. Bununla birlikte insan türünün çıkarlarını insan dışı türlerinkinden üstün tutmaya karşılık gelen türcülük insanın ahlaki sorumluluk alanını türe üyeliğe göre sınırlandırır. Bu çalışmada türcülük ve hayvanlara zihin atfının hayvan hakları için kolektif eylem yönelimiyle olan ilişkisinde hayvanlarla empatinin dolaylı rolü incelenmiştir. Çalışma örneklemini yaşları ranjı 18 ile 61 arasında değişen (Myaş = 25,56, SD = 7,80), 196 kadın ve 103 erkek oluşturmaktadır. Katılımcılara demografik bilgi formu ile türcülük, hayvanlara zihin (duyum ve akıl kapasitesi) atfı, hayvanlarla empati ve hayvan hakları için kolektif eylemlere katılım yönelimini değerlendirmeye yönelik ölçekler uygulanmıştır. Bulgulara göre hayvanlarla duygusal ve bilişsel empati kurma, türcülük ile kolektif eylem yönelimi arasındaki ilişkiyi dolaylı olarak açıklamaktadır. Hayvanlarla duygusal empati kurma ayrıca hayvanların duyum kapasitesine ilişkin atıflar ile kolektif eylem yönelimi arasındaki ilişkiyi dolaylı olarak açıklamıştır. Bulgular hayvan hakları için kolektif eylem yöneliminde hayvanlara yönelik empatiyle bağlantılı mekanizmaların önemine işaret etmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• türcülük
• hayvanlarla empati
• hayvan hakları
• kolektif eylem

Kaynakça

1. Altınal, B. E. (2019). Hayvanların türcülük bağlamında ötekileştirilmesi (Yayın no. 566064) [Yüksek lisans tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi]. Yükseköğretim Kurulu Başkanlığı Tez Merkezi.
2. Amiot, C. E., & Bastian, B. (2017). Solidarity with animals: Assessing a relevant dimension of social identification with animals. PLOS ONE, 12(1), e0168184. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168184
3. Angantyr, M., Hansen, E. M., Eklund, J. H., & Malm, K. (2016). Reducing sex differences in children’s empathy for animals through a training intervention. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 30(3), 273–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2016.1178198
4. Apostol, L., Rebega, O. L., & Miclea, M. (2013). Psychological and socio-demographic predictors of attitudes toward animals. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 78, 521–525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.04.343
5. Bagci, S. C., & Turnuklu, A. (2019). Intended, unintended, and unknown consequences of contact: The role of positive-negative contact on outgroup attitudes, collective action tendencies, and psychological well-being. Social Psychology, 50(1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000355
6. Bastian, B., & Loughnan, S. (2017). Resolving the meat-paradox: A motivational account of morally troublesome behavior and its maintenance. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21(3), 278–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316647562
7. Bastian, B., Loughnan, S., Haslam, N., & Radke, H. R. M. (2012). Don’t mind meat? The denial of mind to animals used for human consumption. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(2), 247–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211424291
8. Batson, C. D., Ahmad, N., & Tsang, J.-a. (2002). Four motives for community involvement. Journal of Social Issues, 58(3), 429–445. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00269

9. Batson, C. D., Polycarpou, M. P., Harmon-Jones, E., Imhoff, H. J., Mitchener, E. C., Bednar, L. L., Klein, T. R., & Highberger, L. (1997). Empathy and attitudes: Can feeling for a member of a stigmatized group improve feelings toward the group? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(1), 105–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.1.105
10. Bentham, J. (2000). An introduction to the principles of morality and legislation. Batoche Books.
11. Berenguer, J. (2007). The effect of empathy in proenvironmental attitudes and behaviors. Environment and Behavior, 39(2), 269–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916506292937
12. Bilewicz, M., Imhoff, R., & Drogosz, M. (2011). The humanity of what we eat: Conceptions of human uniqueness among vegetarians and omnivores. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(2), 201–209. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.766
13. Brady, H. E. (1994). Political participation. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Ed.), Measures of political attitudes (pp. 737 – 801). Academic Press.
14. Bratanova, B., Loughnan, S., & Bastian, B. (2011). The effect of categorization as food on the perceived moral standing of animals. Appetite, 57(1), 193–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2011.04.020
15. Brown, R. (2010). Prejudice: Its social psychology. John Wiley & Sons.
16. Bujang, M. A., Sa’at, N., & Sidik, T. M. I. T. A. B. (2017). Determination of minimum sample size requirement for multiple linear regression and analysis of covariance based on experimental and non-experimental studies. Epidemiology Biostatistics and Public Health 14(3), e12117-1-e12117-9. https://doi.org/10.2427/12117
17. Burghardt, G. M. (2004). Ground rules for dealing with anthropomorphism. Nature, 430(6995), 15. https://doi.org/10.1038/430015b
18. Caviola, L. (2019). How we value animals: The psychology of animals. [Dissertation, University of Oxford]. Oxford University Research Archive. https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:9000a8be-b6dc-4c63-88e8-974b9daaa83a
19. Caviola, L., Everett, J. A. C., & Faber, N. S. (2019). The moral standing of animals: Towards a psychology of speciesism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116(6), 1011–1029. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000182
20. Caviola, L., Kahane, G., Everett, J. A. C., Teperman, E., Savulescu, J., & Faber, N. S. (2021). Utilitarianism for animals, Kantianism for people? Harming animals and humans for the greater good. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 150(5), 1008–1039. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000988
21. Cornish, A., Raubenheimer, D., & McGreevy, P. (2016). What we know about the public’s level of concern for farm animal welfare in food production in developed countries. Animals, 6, 74. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani6110074
22. Crimston, C. R., Bain, P. G., Hornsey, M. J., & Bastian, B. (2016). Moral expansiveness: Examining variability in the extension of the moral world. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111(4), 636–653. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000086
23. Çakal, H., Hewstone, M., Güler, M., & Heath, A. (2016). Predicting support for collective action in the conflict between Turks and Kurds: Perceived threats as a mediator of intergroup contact and social identity. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 19(6), 732–752. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430216641303
24. Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113
25. D’Andrade, R. (1987). The folk model of the mind. In D. Holland & N. Quinn (Ed.), Cultural models in language and thought (pp. 112–148). Cambridge University Press.
26. de Waal, F. B. M. (2008). Putting the altruism back into altruism: The evolution of empathy. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(1), 279-300. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093625
27. de Waal, F. B. M. (2009). The age of empathy: Nature’s lessons for a kinder society. McClelland & Stewart.
28. de Waal, F. B. M. (2017). Are we smart enough to know how smart animals are? Copernicus Center Press.
29. Dhont, K., & Hodson, G. (2014). Why do right-wing adherents engage in more animal exploitation and meat consumption? Personality and Individual Differences, 64, 12–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.02.002
30. Dhont, K., Hodson, G., & Leite, A. C. (2016). Common ideological roots of speciesism and generalized ethnic prejudice: The social dominance human-animal relations model (sd‐harm). European Journal of Personality, 30(6), 507–522. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2069
31. Dhont, K., Hodson, G., Leite, A. C., & Salmen, A. (2020). The psychology of speciesism. İçinde K. Dhont & G. Hodson (Ed.), Why people love and exploit animals: Bridging insights from academia and advocacy (ss. 29–49). Routledge.
32. Dhont, K., Hodson, G., Loughnan, S., & Amiot, C. E. (2019). Rethinking human-animal relations: The critical role of social psychology. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 22(6), 769–784. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430219864455
33. Eddy, T. J., Gallup, G. G., & Povinelli, D. J. (1993). Attribution of cognitive states to animals: Anthropomorphism in comparative perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 49(1), 87–101. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1993.tb00910.x
34. Epley, N., Akalis, S., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2008). Creating social connection through inferential reproduction: Loneliness and perceived agency in gadgets, gods, and greyhounds. Psychological Science, 19(2), 114–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02056.x
35. Epley, N., & Waytz, A. (2009). Mind perception. In S. T. Fiske, D. T. Gilbert, & G. Lindsay (Ed.), The handbook of social psychology (5th Ed., pp. 498–541). Wiley.
36. Everett, J. A. C., Caviola, L., Savulescu, J., & Faber, N. S. (2019). Speciesism, generalized prejudice, and perceptions of prejudiced others. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 22(6), 785–803. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430218816962
37. Francione, G. L. (2010). Animal welfare and the moral value of nonhuman animals. Law, Culture and the Humanities, 6(1), 24–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/1743872109348989
38. Furnham, A., McManus, C., & Scott, D. (2003). Personality, empathy and attitudes to animal welfare. Anthrozoös, 16(2), 135–146. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279303786992260
39. Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029–1046. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015141
40. Gray, H. M., Gray, K., & Wegner, D. M. (2007). Dimensions of mind perception. Science, 315(5812), 619. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1134475
41. Gray, K., Young, L., & Waytz, A. (2012). Mind perception is the essence of morality. Psychological Inquiry, 23(2), 101–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2012.651387
42. Gray, K., & Wegner, D. M. (2009). Moral typecasting: Divergent perceptions of moral agents and moral patients. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(3), 505–520. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013748
43. Gregoire, J. (2018). ITC guidelines for translating and adapting tests (Second edition). International Journal of Testing, 18(2), 101–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2017.1398166
44. Harrison, M. A., & Hall, A. E. (2010). Anthropomorphism, empathy, and perceived communicative ability vary with phylogenetic relatedness to humans. Journal of Social, Evolutionary & Cultural Psychology, 4(1), 34–48. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0099303
45. Haslam, N., Kashima, Y., Loughnan, S., Shi, J., & Suitner, C. (2008). Subhuman, inhuman, and superhuman. Contrasting humans with non-humans in three cultures. Social Cognition, 26(2), 248–258. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2008.26.2.248
46. Hawkins, R. D., & Williams, J. M. (2016). Children’s beliefs about animal minds (Child-BAM): Associations with positive and negative child–animal interactions. Anthrozoös, 29(3), 503–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2016.1189749
47. Herrewijn, L., De Groeve, B., Cauberghe, V., & Hudders, L. (2021). VR outreach and meat reduction advocacy: The role of presence, empathic concern and speciesism in predicting meat reduction intentions. Appetite, 166, 105455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2021.105455
48. Herzog, H. (2010). Some we love, some we hate, some we eat: Why it’s so hard to think straight about animals. HarperCollins.
49. Hills, A. M. (1993). The motivational bases of attitudes toward animals. Society & Animals: Journal of Human-Animal Studies, 1(2), 111–128. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853093X00028
50. Hills, A. M. (1995). Empathy and belief in the mental experiences of animals. Anthrozoös, 8(3), 132–142. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279395787156347
51. Horta, O. (2010). What is speciesism? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 23(3), 243–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-009-9205-2
52. Joy, M. (2020). Why we love dogs, eat pigs, and wear cows: An introduction to carnism. Red Wheel Weiser.
53. Klandermans, B. (1997). The social psychology of protest. Basic Blackwell.
54. Knight, S., Vrij, A., Bard, K., & Brandon, D. (2009). Science versus human welfare? Understanding attitudes toward animal use. Journal of Social Issues, 65(3), 463–483. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2009.01609.x
55. Knight, S., Vrij, A., Cherryman, J., & Nunkoosing, K. (2004). Attitudes towards animal use and belief in animal mind. Anthrozoös, 17(1), 43–62. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279304786991945
56. Kristjánsson, K. (2004). Empathy, sympathy, justice and the child. Journal of Moral Education, 33(3), 291–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305724042000733064
57. Kteily, N., Ho, A. K., & Sidanius, J. (2012). Hierarchy in the mind: The predictive power of social dominance orientation across social contexts and domains. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(2), 543–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.11.007
58. Kupsala, S., Vinnari, M., Jokinen, P., & Räsänen, P. (2016). Public perceptions of mental capacities of nonhuman animals: Finnish population survey. Society & Animals, 24(5), 445–466. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685306-12341423
59. La Fondation Droit Animal, Éthique et Sciences. (2018). Declaration of animal rights. https://www.fondation-droit-animal.org/la-fondation/declaration-des-droits-de-lanimal/declaration-of-animal-rights-en
60. Leach, S., Sutton, R. M., Dhont, K., Douglas, K. M., & Bergström, Z. M. (2023). Changing minds about minds: Evidence that people are too sceptical about animal sentience. Cognition, 230, 105263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105263
61. Leite, A. C., Dhont, K., & Hodson, G. (2019). Longitudinal effects of human supremacy beliefs and vegetarian threat on moral exclusion (vs. inclusion) of animals. European Journal of Social Psychology, 49, 179–189. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2497
62. Loughnan, S., Haslam, N., & Bastian, B. (2010). The role of meat consumption in the denial of moral status and mind to meat animals. Appetite, 55(1), 156–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2010.05.043
63. Myers, G. (2007). The significance of children and animals: Social development and our connections to other species (2nd Ed.). Purdue University Press.
64. Niemyjska, A., Cantarero, K., Byrka, K., & Bilewicz, M. (2018). Too humanlike to increase my appetite: Disposition to anthropomorphize animals relates to decreased meat consumption through empathic concern. Appetite, 127, 21–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2018.04.012
65. Özkan, K. (2014). Kadınların kolektif eylem yöneliminin yordayıcıları: Kültürel benlik kurguları, kadın kimliği ile özdeşleşme, kadınların sosyal baskınlık yönelimi ve sistemi meşrulaştırma eğilimi (Yayın no. 363758) [Yüksek lisans tezi, Uludağ Üniversitesi]. Yükseköğretim Kurulu Başkanlığı Tez Merkezi.
66. Paul, E. (2000). Empathy with animals and with humans: Are they linked? Anthrozoös, 13(4), 194–202. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279300786999699
67. Piazza, J., & Loughnan, S. (2016). When meat gets personal, animals’ minds matter less: Motivated use of intelligence information in judgments of moral standing. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(8), 867–874. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616660159
68. Pinker, S. (2011). The better angels of our nature: Why violence has declined. Penguin.
69. Plous, S. (1991). An attitude survey of animal rights activists. Psychological Science, 2(3), 194–196. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1991.tb00131.x
70. Plous, S. (1993). Psychological mechanisms in the human use of animals. Journal of Social Issues, 49(1), 11–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1993.tb00907.x
71. Plous S. (2003). Is there such a thing as prejudice toward animals? In S. Plous (Ed.), Understanding prejudice and discrimination (pp. 509–528). McGraw-Hill.
72. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 36(4), 717–731. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206553
73. Reid, C., Davis, H., Horlin, C., Anderson, M., Baughman, N., & Campbell, C. (2013). The Kids’ Empathic Development Scale (KEDS): A multi-dimensional measure of empathy in primary school-aged children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 31(2), 231–256. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12002
74. Rothgerber, H., & Mican, F. (2014). Childhood pet ownership, attachment to pets, and subsequent meat avoidance. The mediating role of empathy toward animals. Appetite, 79, 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2014.03.032
75. Ryder, R. D. (2004). Speciesism revisited. Think, 2(06), 83–92. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1477175600002840
76. Serpell, J. A. (2009). Having our dogs and eating them too: Why animals are a social issue. Journal of Social Issues, 65(3), 633–644. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2009.01617.x
77. Signal, T. D., & Taylor, N. (2007). Attitude to animals and empathy: Comparing animal protection and general community samples. Anthrozoös, 20(2), 125–130. https://doi.org/10.2752/175303707X207918
78. Singer, P. (1975). Animal liberation: A new ethics for our treatment of animals. New York Review.
79. Singer, P. (1981). The expanding circle: Ethics and sociobiology. Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
80. Tam, K.-P. (2015). Mind attribution to nature and proenvironmental behavior. Ecopsychology, 7(2), 87–95. https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2014.0054
81. Taylor, L. K., O’Driscoll, D., Dautel, J. B., & McKeown, S. (2020). Empathy to action: Child and adolescent out‐group attitudes and prosocial behaviors in a setting of intergroup conflict. Social Development, 29(2), 461–477. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12421
82. Taylor, L. K., & McKeown, S. (2021). Adolescent outgroup helping, collective action, and political activism in a setting of protracted conflict. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 85, 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2021.09.001
83. Taylor, N., & Signal, T. D. (2005). Empathy and attitudes to animals. Anthrozoös, 18(1), 18–27. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279305785594342
84. Thovex, L. (2022). Anti speciesism. Challenges for a fair relationship between humans and other sensitive species in the face of political liberalism [Master’s thesis, University of Geneva]. The Archive Ouverte UNIGE. https://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:164716
85. Urquiza-Haas, E. G., & Kotrschal, K. (2015). The mind behind anthropomorphic thinking: Attribution of mental states to other species. Animal Behaviour, 109, 167–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.08.011
86. van Zomeren, M., & Iyer, A. (2009). Introduction to the social and psychological dynamics of collective action. Journal of Social Issues, 65(4), 645–660. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2009.01618.x
87. Verducci, S. (2000). A moral method? Thoughts on cultivating empathy through method acting. Journal of Moral Education, 29(1), 87–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/030572400102952
88. Waytz, A., Cacioppo, J., & Epley, N. (2010). Who sees human? The stability and importance of individual differences in anthropomorphism. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(3), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610369336
89. Wuensch, K., Poteat, G., & Jernigan, L. (1991, June). Support for animal rights and perceived similarity between humans and other animals [Conference session]. The Annual Meeting of the Animal Behavior Society, Wilmington, NC, United States. https://core.ecu.edu/wuenschk/Animals/ABS91.htm
90. Young. A., Khalil, K., & Wharton, J. (2018). Empathy for animals: A review of the existing literature. Curator: The Museum Journal, 61(2), 327–343. https://doi.org/10.1111/CURA.12257