Liking but Devaluing Animals: Emotional and Deliberative Paths to Speciesism

We explore whether priming emotion versus deliberation affects speciesism—the tendency to prioritize certain individuals over others on the basis of their species membership (three main and two supplementary studies, four preregistered; N = 3,288). We find that the tendency to prioritize humans over animals (anthropocentric speciesism) decreases when participants were asked to think emotionally compared to deliberatively. In contrast, the tendency to prioritize dogs over other animals (pet speciesism) increases when participants were asked to think emotionally compared to deliberatively. We hypothesize that, emotionally, people like animals in general and dogs in particular; however, deliberatively, people attribute higher moral status to humans than animals and roughly equal status to dogs, chimpanzees, elephants, and pigs. In support of this explanation, participants tended to discriminate between animals based on likability when thinking emotionally and based on moral status when thinking deliberatively. These findings shed light on the psychological underpinnings of speciesism.

[1]  Trudy Owens,et al.  Altruism, fast and slow? Evidence from a meta-analysis and a new experiment , 2020, Experimental Economics.

[2]  Wouter Kool,et al.  Reasoning supports utilitarian resolutions to moral dilemmas across diverse measures. , 2020, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[3]  B. Bastian,et al.  Social identification with animals: Unpacking our psychological connection with other animals. , 2020, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[4]  S. Loughnan,et al.  Rethinking human-animal relations: The critical role of social psychology , 2019, Group Processes & Intergroup Relations.

[5]  Valerio Capraro,et al.  The Dual-Process Approach to Human Sociality: A Review , 2019, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[6]  N. Faber,et al.  The Moral Standing of Animals: Towards a Psychology of Speciesism , 2019, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[7]  M. Johannesson,et al.  The intuitive cooperation hypothesis revisited: a meta-analytic examination of effect size and between-study heterogeneity , 2019, Journal of the Economic Science Association.

[8]  V. Capraro,et al.  Priming Intuition Disfavors Instrumental Harm But Not Impartial Beneficence , 2019, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.

[9]  J. Savulescu,et al.  Speciesism, generalized prejudice, and perceptions of prejudiced others , 2018, Group processes & intergroup relations : GPIR.

[10]  R. Byrne,et al.  Moral fatigue: The effects of cognitive fatigue on moral reasoning , 2018, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[11]  Gordon Hodson,et al.  Longitudinal effects of human supremacy beliefs and vegetarianism threat on moral exclusion (vs. inclusion) of animals , 2018, European Journal of Social Psychology.

[12]  N. McLatchie,et al.  Are Baby Animals Less Appetizing? Tenderness toward Baby Animals and Appetite for Meat , 2018 .

[13]  Janis H. Zickfeld,et al.  Too sweet to eat: Exploring the effects of cuteness on meat consumption , 2018, Appetite.

[14]  M. Crockett,et al.  Beyond Sacrificial Harm: A Two-Dimensional Model of Utilitarian Psychology , 2017, Psychological review.

[15]  David G. Rand,et al.  Signaling Emotion and Reason in Cooperation , 2017, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[16]  S. Loughnan,et al.  Thinking morally about animals , 2017 .

[17]  S. Loughnan,et al.  Resolving the Meat-Paradox: A Motivational Account of Morally Troublesome Behavior and Its Maintenance , 2017, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[18]  B. Bastian,et al.  Solidarity with Animals: Assessing a Relevant Dimension of Social Identification with Animals , 2017, PloS one.

[19]  Gordon Hodson,et al.  Common Ideological Roots of Speciesism and Generalized Ethnic Prejudice: The Social Dominance Human–Animal Relations Model (SD–HARM) , 2016 .

[20]  S. Loughnan,et al.  When Meat Gets Personal, Animals’ Minds Matter Less , 2016 .

[21]  David G. Rand.  Cooperation, Fast and Slow , 2016, Psychological science.

[22]  David G. Rand,et al.  Social Heuristics and Social Roles: Intuition Favors Altruism for Women But Not for Men , 2016, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[23]  David G. Rand,et al.  Intuition, deliberation, and the evolution of cooperation , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  S. Kagan.  What's Wrong with Speciesism? , 2015 .

[25]  B. Bastian,et al.  Toward a psychology of human-animal relations. , 2015, Psychological bulletin.

[26]  David G. Rand,et al.  Social heuristics shape intuitive cooperation , 2014, Nature Communications.

[27]  Kimberly Costello,et al.  Social dominance orientation connects prejudicial human–human and human–animal relations , 2014 .

[28]  David G. Rand,et al.  Spontaneous giving and calculated greed , 2012, Nature.

[29]  Jean‐François Bonnefon,et al.  Mortality salience and morality: Thinking about death makes people less utilitarian , 2012, Cognition.

[30]  N. Haslam,et al.  Don’t Mind Meat? The Denial of Mind to Animals Used for Human Consumption , 2012, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[31]  Brock Bastian,et al.  Humanness, dehumanization, and moral psychology , 2011 .

[32]  S. Loughnan,et al.  The effect of categorization as food on the perceived moral standing of animals , 2011, Appetite.

[33]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment , 2008, Cognition.

[34]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  An fMRI Investigation of Emotional Engagement in Moral Judgment , 2001, Science.

[35]  Jeremy Bentham,et al.  The Principles of Morals and Legislation , 1988 .

[36]  J. B. Callicott,et al.  The Case for Animal Rights , 1985 .