Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > When is it wrong to eat animals?

Research

Links

Text available via DOI:

Keywords

View graph of relations

When is it wrong to eat animals?: The relevance of different animal traits and behaviours

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

When is it wrong to eat animals? The relevance of different animal traits and behaviours. / Leach, Stefan; Sutton, Robbie M.; Dhont, Kristof et al.
In: European Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 51, No. 1, 28.02.2021, p. 113-123.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Leach, S, Sutton, RM, Dhont, K & Douglas, KM 2021, 'When is it wrong to eat animals? The relevance of different animal traits and behaviours', European Journal of Social Psychology, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 113-123. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2718

APA

Leach, S., Sutton, R. M., Dhont, K., & Douglas, K. M. (2021). When is it wrong to eat animals? The relevance of different animal traits and behaviours. European Journal of Social Psychology, 51(1), 113-123. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2718

Vancouver

Leach S, Sutton RM, Dhont K, Douglas KM. When is it wrong to eat animals? The relevance of different animal traits and behaviours. European Journal of Social Psychology. 2021 Feb 28;51(1):113-123. Epub 2021 Jan 18. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2718

Author

Leach, Stefan ; Sutton, Robbie M. ; Dhont, Kristof et al. / When is it wrong to eat animals? The relevance of different animal traits and behaviours. In: European Journal of Social Psychology. 2021 ; Vol. 51, No. 1. pp. 113-123.

Bibtex

@article{aa7264956b7a4b21aba038a42dfb6148,
title = "When is it wrong to eat animals?: The relevance of different animal traits and behaviours",
abstract = "Research suggests that animals{\textquoteright} capacity for agency, experience, and benevolence predict beliefs about their moral treatment. Four studies built on this work by examining how fine-grained information about animals{\textquoteright} traits and behaviours (e.g., can store food for later vs. can use tools) shifted moral beliefs about eating and harming animals. The information that most strongly affected moral beliefs was related to secondary emotions (e.g., can feel love), morality (e.g., will share food with others), empathy (e.g., can feel others' pain), social connections (e.g., will look for deceased family members), and moral patiency (e.g., can feel pain). In addition, information affected moral judgements in line with how it affected superordinate representations about animals{\textquoteright} capacity for experience/feeling but not agency/thinking. The results provide a fine-grained outline of how, and why, information about animals{\textquoteright} traits and behaviours informs moral judgements.",
keywords = "animals, meat eating, mind attribution, morality",
author = "Stefan Leach and Sutton, {Robbie M.} and Kristof Dhont and Douglas, {Karen M.}",
year = "2021",
month = feb,
day = "28",
doi = "10.1002/ejsp.2718",
language = "English",
volume = "51",
pages = "113--123",
journal = "European Journal of Social Psychology",
issn = "0046-2772",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Ltd",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - When is it wrong to eat animals?

T2 - The relevance of different animal traits and behaviours

AU - Leach, Stefan

AU - Sutton, Robbie M.

AU - Dhont, Kristof

AU - Douglas, Karen M.

PY - 2021/2/28

Y1 - 2021/2/28

N2 - Research suggests that animals’ capacity for agency, experience, and benevolence predict beliefs about their moral treatment. Four studies built on this work by examining how fine-grained information about animals’ traits and behaviours (e.g., can store food for later vs. can use tools) shifted moral beliefs about eating and harming animals. The information that most strongly affected moral beliefs was related to secondary emotions (e.g., can feel love), morality (e.g., will share food with others), empathy (e.g., can feel others' pain), social connections (e.g., will look for deceased family members), and moral patiency (e.g., can feel pain). In addition, information affected moral judgements in line with how it affected superordinate representations about animals’ capacity for experience/feeling but not agency/thinking. The results provide a fine-grained outline of how, and why, information about animals’ traits and behaviours informs moral judgements.

AB - Research suggests that animals’ capacity for agency, experience, and benevolence predict beliefs about their moral treatment. Four studies built on this work by examining how fine-grained information about animals’ traits and behaviours (e.g., can store food for later vs. can use tools) shifted moral beliefs about eating and harming animals. The information that most strongly affected moral beliefs was related to secondary emotions (e.g., can feel love), morality (e.g., will share food with others), empathy (e.g., can feel others' pain), social connections (e.g., will look for deceased family members), and moral patiency (e.g., can feel pain). In addition, information affected moral judgements in line with how it affected superordinate representations about animals’ capacity for experience/feeling but not agency/thinking. The results provide a fine-grained outline of how, and why, information about animals’ traits and behaviours informs moral judgements.

KW - animals

KW - meat eating

KW - mind attribution

KW - morality

U2 - 10.1002/ejsp.2718

DO - 10.1002/ejsp.2718

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:85099467483

VL - 51

SP - 113

EP - 123

JO - European Journal of Social Psychology

JF - European Journal of Social Psychology

SN - 0046-2772

IS - 1

ER -