Ethicists, policy-makers, and the general public have questioned whether artificial entities such as robots warrant rights or other forms of moral consideration. There is little synthesis of the research on this topic so far. We identify 294 relevant research or discussion items in our literature review of this topic. There is widespread agreement among scholars that some artificial entities could warrant moral consideration in the future, if not also the present. The reasoning varies, such as concern for the effects on artificial entities and concern for the effects on human society. Beyond the conventional consequentialist, deontological, and virtue ethicist ethical frameworks, some scholars encourage “information ethics” and “social-relational” approaches, though there are opportunities for more in-depth ethical research on the nuances of moral consideration of artificial entities. There is limited relevant empirical data collection, primarily in a few psychological studies on current moral and social attitudes of humans towards robots and other artificial entities. This suggests an important gap for psychological, sociological, economic, and organizational research on how artificial entities will be integrated into society and the factors that will determine how the interests of artificial entities are considered.

No abstract

Transitioning toward more plant-based diets can alleviate health and sustainability challenges. However, research on interventions that influence animal-product consumption remains fragmented and inaccessible to researchers and practitioners. We conducted an overview of systematic reviews, also known as a meta-review. We searched five databases for reviews that examined interventions that influence (increase or decrease) the consumption of animal products. We quantitatively summarised results using individual studies' directions of effect because reviews rarely reported effect sizes of primary studies. We also discussed the contexts in which the evidence for interventions appeared strongest in light of the broader literature on behaviour change. Eighteen systematic reviews met inclusion criteria, 12 of which examined interventions intended to decrease animal-product consumption and 6 of which examined interventions intended to increase animal-product consumption. In total, only two reviews conducted quantitative meta-analyses. Across all reviews, vote counting based on the direction of individual studies’ estimates indicated that providing information on the environmental impact of meat consumption may reduce consumption, with 10 of 11 estimates suggesting reduced consumption (91% [95% CI 62.3%, 98.4%]; p = .012). Providing information on the health consequences of meat consumption, emphasising social norms, and reducing meat portion sizes also appeared promising, albeit with more limited strength of evidence. Reviews examining interventions that decreased consumption predominately focused on meat (10/12 reviews). Future reviews should conduct quantitative syntheses where appropriate and could more frequently examine interventions that influence the consumption of animal products other than meat.

The moral consideration of intelligent artificial entities (e.g., robots, virtual personal assistants) is a topic of growing academic interest. Studies have identified a range of features that are associated with the moral consideration of such entities, often in the context of two accounts: mind perception and humanness (i.e., anthropomorphism and dehumanization). The present study brings together and builds on this growing body of research by evaluating the relative importance of the various features of moral consideration. We conducted an online conjoint experiment in which 1,163 participants evaluated 30,238 profiles of artificial entities that randomly varied on 11 features. All 11 features affected the extent to which participants consider it morally wrong to harm an artificial entity. The two most important features were an entity’s capacity for emotion expression and moral judgment. These were followed by emotion recognition, cooperation, and the entity’s body (in particular, having a human-like physical body). Overall, the results provide support for a humanness account of moral consideration: the more human-like artificial entities are perceived to be in their mental, physical, and behavioral characteristics, the more moral consideration they are given. Within the humanness account, the study supports the view that capacities that are associated with the “human nature” dimension more strongly affect moral consideration than capacities associated with the “uniquely human” dimension, but both dimensions positively affect moral consideration.

Conflicts of interest statementNo funding was received specifically for this study. Jamie Harris and Ali Ladak are researchers at Sentience Institute. Jamie Harris is also a researcher at Animal Advocacy Careers. Maya Mathur is a member of the Research Advisory Board of the Better Food Foundation. Note that, while the aforementioned groups are interested in the outcomes of the study, none of them are directly involved in promoting animal welfare reforms or animal rights advocacy, nor committed to one side of any of the debates mentioned in the introduction of this paper.