Attitudes toward animals are important in influencing how animals are treated. Few studies have investigated attitudes toward animals in veterinary or animal-science students, and no studies have compared attitudes to animals before and after a course teaching animal welfare and ethics. In this study, students enrolled in veterinary (first-year) or animal-science (first- and third-year) programs completed a questionnaire on attitudes toward different categories of animals before and after the course. Higher attitude scores suggest a person more concerned about how an animal is treated. Normally distributed data were compared using parametric statistics, and non-normally distributed data were compared using non-parametric tests, with significance p<.05. Attitudes toward pets (45.5–47.6) were higher than those toward pests (34.2–38.4) or profit animals (30.3–32.1). Attitude scores increased from before to after the course in the veterinary cohort on the Pest (36.9 vs. 38.4, respectively, n=27, p<.05) and Profit (30.3 vs. 32.1, respectively, n=28, p<.05) subscales, but not in the animal-science cohorts. Attitude scores in all categories were higher for women than for men. Currently having an animal was associated with higher pet scores (46.8 vs. 43.8, ns=120 and 13, respectively, p<.05), and having an animal as a child was associated with higher profit scores (31.0 vs. 26.6, ns=129 and 8, respectively, p<.05). Students electing to work with livestock had lower scores on the Pest and Profit subscales, and students wanting to work with wildlife had significantly higher scores on the Pest and Profit subscales. This study demonstrates attitudinal changes after an animal-welfare course, with significant increases in veterinary but not animal-science students.

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...

Despite the increasing interest in, and scope of, human–animal studies, few statistically robust measures of attitudes towards animals exist beyond the Animal Attitude Scale (AAS—Herzog, Betchart and Pittman 1991). While extensively utilized, the AAS does not discriminate between categories of animals, that is, pet, pest, and commercially valued species. The current study was therefore conducted to develop a scale aimed at isolating differences in attitudes towards animals across three different categories: (1) pet (companion animal), (2) pest, and (3) profit/utility animals (PPP). Despite limitations due to a low return rate (n = 210), the PPP scale proved to have strong internal reliability, and related well to the AAS. The development of this scale and initial validation are described. Scores on the “pet” subscale were found to be the highest, followed by those on the “profit” then “pest” scales. Other noteworthy results including interactions between gender, occupation, and scores on the PPP s...

The nomenclature used to describe animals working in roles supporting people can be confusing. The same term may be used to describe different roles, or two terms may mean the same thing. This confusion is evident among researchers, practitioners, and end users. Because certain animal roles are provided with legal protections and/or government-funding support in some jurisdictions, it is necessary to clearly define the existing terms to avoid confusion. The aim of this paper is to provide operationalized definitions for nine terms, which would be useful in many world regions: “assistance animal”, “companion animal”, “educational/school support animal”, “emotional support animal”, “facility animal”, “service animal”, “skilled companion animal”, “therapy animal”, and “visiting/visitation animal”. At the International Society for Anthrozoology (ISAZ) conferences in 2018 and 2020, over 100 delegates participated in workshops to define these terms, many of whom co-authored this paper. Through an iterative process, we have defined the nine terms and explained how they differ from each other. We recommend phasing out two terms (i.e., “skilled companion animal” and “service animal”) due to overlap with other terms that could potentially exacerbate confusion. The implications for several regions of the world are discussed.

The results of various studies have suggested a range of demographic and personality variables that may affect attitudes toward the treatment of nonhuman species; however, the literature has reached little consensus. Various limited populations have used The Attitude to Animals Scale (AAS), developed initially by Herzog, Betchart, and Pittman (1991), as a quantitative measure of attitudes toward the treatment of nonhuman species. The current study administered the AAS to a large community sample within Australia, resulting in approximately 600 respondents. The study found demographic variables such as age, educational level, presence of children in the current dwelling, current, and past companion animal ownership to have no statistically significant effect on AAS scores. The study found both occupation and income to have an effect on AAS scores. This paper examines and discusses all of these variables and their effects (or lack thereof).