ABSTRACT

The present study analyzes the effectiveness (exhaustivity and mutual exclusivity) of a taxonomy for classifying animals into the categories of pet, pest, and profit (PPP), as well as variables that affect the classification assigned to the different species. A total of 463 university students (Mean age = 21.07 years; SD = 4.15), mainly female (87%), classified 14 animal species into the PPP categories and answered questionnaire assessments of personality, anthropomorphism, and attitudes toward the wellbeing of animals. On average, the different species were classified into a single PPP category in 71% of the cases (maximum 95% for dogs, and minimum 27% for chimpanzees), with 8% having multiple classifications (15% for horses and pigs, 21% for rabbits), and 21% being unclassified. Women used the profit category less than men (p < 0.05; g = 0.33). Attitudes toward animals, anthropomorphism, and conscientiousness presented significant correlations (p < 0.05) with the use of PPP categories. Finally, logistic regression analyses showed that these variables had a limited yet significative effect in predicting the classification of horses as either pet or profit (explained variance = 8%) and the classification of snakes as pet or pest (explained variance = 9%), but no effect on the classification of bees as pest or profit. The fact that 29% of the cases received multiple or null classifications indicates the need for caution when considering conclusions drawn from studies based on the PPP taxonomy. Personality, anthropomorphism, sex, and attitudes toward animals’ wellbeing had only a small effect on the classification of animals, but they revealed possible mechanisms for developing interventions to raise awareness about the treatment of animals.

摘要

本研究分析了将动物分类为宠物、害虫和利润 (PPP) 类别的分类法的有效性（穷尽性和互斥性），以及影响分配给不同物种的分类的变量。共有 463 名大学生（平均年龄 = 21.07 岁；SD = 4.15)，主要是女性 (87%)，将 14 种动物物种归入 PPP 类别，并回答了对性格、拟人化和对动物福利的态度的问卷评估。平均而言，不同物种在 71% 的案例中被归为单一的 PPP 类别（狗最多 95%，黑猩猩最少 27%），8% 有多个分类（马和猪的 15%，21%）兔子），21% 未被分类。女性使用利润类别的次数少于男性（p  < 0.05；g  = 0.33）。对动物的态度、拟人化和尽责性呈现出显着的相关性（p < 0.05) 使用 PPP 类别。最后，逻辑回归分析表明，这些变量在预测马被分类为宠物或利润（解释方差 = 8%）以及将蛇分类为宠物或害虫（解释方差 = 9%）方面具有有限但显着的影响，但对蜜蜂作为害虫或利润的分类没有影响。29% 的案例得到多重分类或无效分类这一事实表明，在考虑从基于 PPP 分类法的研究中得出的结论时需要谨慎。个性、拟人化、性别和对动物福祉的态度对动物分类的影响很小，但它们揭示了开发干预措施以提高对动物治疗的认识的可能机制。