We report three randomised and pre-registered experiments examining the effects of narrative fiction (vs. narrative non-fiction vs. expository non-fiction) on concern for animal welfare. In Experiment 1a (N = 363) there was no significant increase in concern for animal welfare or willingness to donate to an animal charity among participants who read a narrative fiction text about a monkey's plight (vs. narrative non-fiction or expository non-fiction texts about a monkey). In Experiment 1b (N =121) concern for animal welfare and willingness to donate was greater after reading the narrative fiction text compared to a narrative non-fiction text unrelated to animals. Experiment 2 (N =184) employed a simplified design and more severe depiction of animal abuse, but showed no beneficial effect of reading a narrative fiction text about a monkey's plight (vs. a narrative non-fiction text unrelated to animals) on either measure. Experiment 3 (N =290) compared a narrative fiction and a non-fiction text about a monkey or a lizard; participants who read a narrative fiction text, irrespective of the animal depicted, reported greater concern for animal welfare, monkey welfare, lizard welfare and nature (vs. a narrative non-fiction text). However, participants were no more willing to donate in the narrative fiction (vs. non-fiction) condition. These results suggest that reading a narrative fiction text about an animal's plight has a limited effect on concern for animal welfare.

我们报告了三个随机和预先注册的实验，检查叙事小说（与叙事非小说与说明性非小说）对动物福利的关注的影响。在实验 1a ( N  = 363) 中，阅读关于猴子困境的叙事小说文本的参与者对动物福利的关注或向动物慈善机构捐款的意愿没有显着增加（与叙事非小说或说明性非小说相比）关于猴子的文字）。在实验 1b ( N = 121) 中，与与动物无关的叙事非小说文本相比，阅读叙事小说文本后，对动物福利和捐赠意愿的关注更大。实验 2 ( N =184）采用了简化的设计和对虐待动物的更严厉的描述，但在任一衡量标准上，阅读关于猴子困境的叙事小说文本（与与动物无关的叙事非小说文本）都没有显示出有益效果。实验 3 ( N = 290) 比较了关于猴子或蜥蜴的叙事小说和非小说文本；阅读叙事小说文本的参与者，无论所描绘的动物如何，都表示更关注动物福利、猴子福利、蜥蜴福利和自然（与叙事非小说文本相比）。然而，参与者不再愿意在叙事小说中捐款（vs.非小说）条件。这些结果表明，阅读关于动物困境的叙事小说文本对动物福利的关注效果有限。