ABSTRACT

People’s perception of the human–animal relationship is complex, as is our regard for animal welfare within law and policy decisions. Little attention has been paid to how political stakeholders utilize culture to identify themselves within the kingdom Animalia or how their identity relates to their political concern for animals. This research provides an overview of the beliefs, identities, and political agendas of law and policy students in the United States through an exploratory, mixed-methods study composed of two concurrent parts: (1) a cross-sectional online survey (n = 231) and (2) in-person, in-depth interviews (n = 21). Part 1 examined (a) cultural beliefs about human origins and political concern for nonhuman animals; (b) when and to what extent participants identify as an animal; and (c) how animal identity relates to their beliefs and political concern for nonhuman animals. Part 2 elaborated on underlying themes, identifying nuances in the perspectives identified in Part 1. Most participants classified humans as animals and their understanding of human origins was predominantly science-based but occasionally referenced religion. Those who stated a belief in human evolution scored significantly higher on the animal identity scale compared with those with purely Creationist beliefs. In turn, identifying more strongly as an animal was significantly associated with placing greater importance on animal issues in law and policy. A structural equation model was fitted and revealed that animal identity mediated the relationship between beliefs about human origins and the ranked importance of animal issues. The most common situations participants recalled feeling like an animal were survival, sexual, physiological, and being outdoors. As the first study to provide a mixed-methods descriptive experience of animal identity, with a focus on cultural understanding of evolutionary theory, these findings describe how the formation of an animal identity might relate to public policy decisions and are particularly relevant to animal activists and identity researchers.

摘要

人们对人与动物关系的看法是复杂的，正如我们在法律和政策决定中对动物福利的考虑一样。很少有人关注政治利益相关者如何利用文化在动物界内确定自己的身份，或者他们的身份如何与他们对动物的政治关注相关联。本研究通过由两个并发部分组成的探索性混合方法研究，概述了美国法律和政策学生的信仰、身份和政治议程：(1) 横断面在线调查 ( n  = 231 ) 和 (2) 面对面的深入访谈 ( n = 21）。第 1 部分审查了 (a) 关于人类起源的文化信仰和对非人类动物的政治关注；(b) 参与者何时以及在多大程度上认定为动物；(c) 动物身份如何与他们对非人类动物的信仰和政治关注相关联。第 2 部分详细阐述了基本主题，确定了第 1 部分中确定的观点的细微差别。大多数参与者将人类归类为动物，他们对人类起源的理解主要基于科学，但偶尔也会提及宗教。那些表示相信人类进化的人在动物身份量表上的得分明显高于那些纯粹相信神创论的人。反过来，更强烈地识别为动物与在法律和政策中更加重视动物问题显着相关。拟合了结构方程模型并揭示了动物身份在关于人类起源的信念与动物问题的重要性排序之间的关系中起中介作用。参与者回忆起像动物一样的最常见情况是生存、性、生理和户外活动。作为第一项提供混合方法描述动物身份体验的研究，重点是对进化论的文化理解，这些发现描述了动物身份的形成可能如何与公共政策决策相关，尤其与动物活动家和身份研究人员。参与者回忆起像动物一样的最常见情况是生存、性、生理和户外活动。作为第一项提供混合方法描述动物身份体验的研究，重点是对进化论的文化理解，这些发现描述了动物身份的形成可能如何与公共政策决策相关，尤其与动物活动家和身份研究人员。参与者回忆起像动物一样的最常见情况是生存、性、生理和户外活动。作为第一项提供混合方法描述动物身份体验的研究，重点是对进化论的文化理解，这些发现描述了动物身份的形成可能如何与公共政策决策相关，尤其与动物活动家和身份研究人员。