Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

<p>Humans care for the wellbeing of some animals (e.g. dogs), yet tacitly endorse the maltreatment of others (e.g. pigs). What treatment we find morally appropriate for an animal depends on whether we characterise it as “pet” or “food”. Is this categorisation of animals and the resulting moral hierarchy of species present in childhood or instead taught through the lifespan? Comparing samples of children (9-11-years-old), young adults (18-21-years-old), and adults (29-59-years-old; total N=479), we find that children as compared to young adults and adults, a) show less speciesism, i.e. moral worth tied less to species-membership, b) are less likely to categorise farm animals as food than pets, c) think farm animals ought to be treated better, and d) deem eating meat and animal products less morally acceptable. These results are not due to children having a lower general acceptance of violence against living beings than adults. Our findings imply that our moral view of animal worth is not innate but instead develops over the lifespan in our specific societal context.</p>

Original publication

DOI

10.31234/osf.io/fte9m

Type

Journal article

Publisher

Center for Open Science

Publication Date

08/12/2020