Attitudes toward animals, and how species and purpose affect animal research justifiability, among undergraduate students and faculty

Abstract

As members of a university community that sponsors animal research, we developed a survey to improve our knowledge about factors underlying the perceived justifiability of animal research among faculty and undergraduate students. To accomplish this objective, we gathered quantitative data about their general views on animal use by humans, their specific views about the use of different species to address different categories of scientific questions, and their confidence in the translatability of animal research to humans. Students and faculty did not differ in their reported levels of concern for the human use of animals, but women reported significantly higher levels of concern than men. Among students, experience with animal research was positively correlated with less concern with animal use, and having practiced vegetarianism or veganism was associated with more concern. Gender, experience with animal research, and dietary preferences were similarly correlated with the extent of justifiability of animal use across all research purposes and species. Faculty responses resembled those for students, with the exception that justifiability varied significantly based on academic discipline: biological sciences faculty were least concerned about human use of animals and most supportive of animal research regardless of purpose or species. For both students and faculty, justifiability varied depending on research purpose or animal species. Research purposes, ranked in order of justifiability from high to low, was animal disease, human disease, basic research, human medicine, animal production, chemical testing, and cosmetics. Justifiability by purpose was slightly lower for students than for faculty. Species justifiability for students, from high to low, was small fish, rats or mice, pigs or sheep, monkeys, and dogs or cats. Faculty order was the same except that monkeys and dogs or cats were reversed in order. Finally, confidence in the translatability of animal research to our understanding of human biology and medicine was not different between students and faculty or between genders, but among faculty it was highest in biological sciences followed by physical sciences, social sciences, and then arts and humanities. Those

A survey on the use of mice, pigs, dogs and monkeys as animal models in biomedical research in Spain

“…In the group that had never worked with animals, those who identified as women were more likely to object to animal use than those who identified as men. This finding is consistent with those reported by previous studies [ 7 , 22 ]. However, in the group of participants who used to work with animals, the opposite effect was observed.…”

Should Animal Welfare be Included in Educational Programs? Attitudes of Secondary and University Students from Eight EU Countries

“… Do you agree with observing animal behavior in an experiment? (Sandgren et al, 2020;Phillips et al 2012c).…”

“… Do you agree that medical experiments use animals to improve human health? (Sandgren et al, 2020;Phillips et al 2012b)  Do you agree with testing cosmetics or household products on animals? (Sandgren et al, 2020;Cornish et al, 2020;Phillips et al 2012b).…”

Influence of animal pain and distress on judgments of animal research justifiability among university undergraduate students and faculty

“…Surveys are used commonly to explore ethical views about animal research. We have taken this approach to identify university undergraduate and faculty views on animal research [ 20 , 21 ]. In the current report, we examine the role of animal pain or distress on views about animal research.…”

“…It also has been the target of protests by animal activists. Our overarching objectives in this study were to determine the importance of the issue of animal research to our academic community and to evaluate their knowledge about and trust in specific sources of information on this subject [ 20 ], to understand the dependence of judgements about research justifiability on experimental purpose and species [ 21 ], and to identify whether and how animal pain or distress influenced views of research justifiability. Below, we present findings and conclusions related to this latter objective by addressing the following specific questions: (i) how does experimental pain or distress influence respondents’ judgements about the justifiability of different research purposes; (ii) how does it influence perceived justifiability of use of different research species; and (iii) how does support of research involving animal pain or distress depend on respondent gender, academic discipline, student year or faculty rank, dietary preferences, and experience with animal research?…”