Attitudes Toward Animals - Revision history

Chris: /* The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum */

2025-08-12T05:03:46Z

The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:03, 12 August 2025
Line 45:		Line 45:
	As most people who work for such causes do so outside of academia, the taxonomy was restricted to conventional terms so those terms could be more easily used in non-academic channels.		As most people who work for such causes do so outside of academia, the taxonomy was restricted to conventional terms so those terms could be more easily used in non-academic channels.

	A spectrum of common human attitudes toward animals can be broadly arranged according to how frequently people make significant sacrifices to put the needs of animals ahead of their own needs.		A spectrum of common human attitudes toward animals can be broadly arranged according to how frequently people make significant sacrifices to put the needs of animals ahead of their own needs. This measure can be seen as an observable and measurable expression of several attitudes which include the relative importance they put on their own needs, the needs of humans in general, the needs of their pets, and the needs of animals in general; it would be expected that the differential attitudinal values within these groups would be similar.

	At either end of this spectrum are the extreme outliers: Animal Abusers and Animal Fanatics, who can be largely ignored by architects as their behavior toward animals is more indicative of mental disorders than environmental design is unlikely to change. Animal Avoiders must be considered when designing any space intended for general use; however, where it gets the most interesting is in the middle of the spectrum, including Tolerators and Advocates, but especially Enthusiasts and Altruists, as these make up the vast majority of the population who might seem similar on self-reported surveys, but whose behavior helps illustrate what they really mean when they say they like animals. <!--		At either end of this spectrum are the extreme outliers: Animal Abusers and Animal Fanatics, who can be largely ignored by architects as their behavior toward animals is more indicative of mental disorders than environmental design is unlikely to change. Animal Avoiders must be considered when designing any space intended for general use; however, where it gets the most interesting is in the middle of the spectrum, including Tolerators and Advocates, but especially Enthusiasts and Altruists, as these make up the vast majority of the population who might seem similar on self-reported surveys, but whose behavior helps illustrate what they really mean when they say they like animals. <!--

Chris: /* The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum */

2025-08-12T04:58:48Z

The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:58, 12 August 2025
Line 51:		Line 51:
	TO ADD: Change sacrifice frequency metric, or add to it		TO ADD: Change sacrifice frequency metric, or add to it
	New Metric: Two points that represent the relative importance of humans or ones self wellbeing (big imbalance between self and rest of world indicates too much or too little self-importance), vs importance of animals wellbeing.		New Metric: Two points that represent the relative importance of humans or ones self wellbeing (big imbalance between self and rest of world indicates too much or too little self-importance), vs importance of animals wellbeing.

			Measure:
			Importance of self
			Importance of any human
			Importance of pet animal
			Importance of any animal


	Self Animal		Self Animal
	Abusers 10 0		Abusers 10 0

Chris at 04:52, 12 August 2025

2025-08-12T04:52:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:52, 12 August 2025
Line 37:		Line 37:
	A taxonomy of the attitudes humans most commonly exhibit toward animals, as measured through their observable actions, would help describe how people actually think and feel about them. This in turn would help foster understanding and organize discussion of the dynamics between individuals and groups with differing worldviews.		A taxonomy of the attitudes humans most commonly exhibit toward animals, as measured through their observable actions, would help describe how people actually think and feel about them. This in turn would help foster understanding and organize discussion of the dynamics between individuals and groups with differing worldviews.
	Furthermore, since trade-off analyses depend on what different groups are willing to sacrifice for each other, it would be most useful to use, as an empirical measure, the amount humans typically sacrifice for animals in their daily lives as an accurate measure of their attitude toward them.		Furthermore, since trade-off analyses depend on what different groups are willing to sacrifice for each other, it would be most useful to use, as an empirical measure, the amount humans typically sacrifice for animals in their daily lives as an accurate measure of their attitude toward them.

			== The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum ==

	Since a nomenclature describing groups in this manner could not be located, the following taxonomy was created.		Since a nomenclature describing groups in this manner could not be located, the following taxonomy was created.
Line 43:		Line 45:
	As most people who work for such causes do so outside of academia, the taxonomy was restricted to conventional terms so those terms could be more easily used in non-academic channels.		As most people who work for such causes do so outside of academia, the taxonomy was restricted to conventional terms so those terms could be more easily used in non-academic channels.

	~~== The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum ==~~		A spectrum of common human attitudes toward animals can be broadly arranged according to how frequently people make significant sacrifices to put the needs of animals ahead of their own needs.

	~~TO ADD: Introductory paragraph that dismisses the outliers at both ends of the~~ spectrum~~, different kinds~~ of ~~unhealthily unbalanced.~~
	~~Then say where it gets interesting, in the middle, so the reader knows they~~ can ~~skip~~ the ~~abuser and go for the interesting part.~~
	~~Where it gets the most interesting is in the middle, where most people are -- we all love~~ animals~~, but what does this really mean?~~
	~~Maybe reverse spectrum so zealot is first, less negavtive~~.

			At either end of this spectrum are the extreme outliers: Animal Abusers and Animal Fanatics, who can be largely ignored by architects as their behavior toward animals is more indicative of mental disorders than environmental design is unlikely to change. Animal Avoiders must be considered when designing any space intended for general use; however, where it gets the most interesting is in the middle of the spectrum, including Tolerators and Advocates, but especially Enthusiasts and Altruists, as these make up the vast majority of the population who might seem similar on self-reported surveys, but whose behavior helps illustrate what they really mean when they say they like animals. <!--

	TO ADD: Change sacrifice frequency metric, or add to it		TO ADD: Change sacrifice frequency metric, or add to it
Line 63:		Line 61:

	Could also just focus on the differential value, which suggests willingness to sacrifice		Could also just focus on the differential value, which suggests willingness to sacrifice
	Use candles to show ranges of values, because some, even just ~~enthusaists~~, may value one animal above themselves, like parents with their kids vs all other kids		Use candles to show ranges of values, because some, even just enthusiasts, may value one animal above themselves, like parents with their kids vs all other kids
			-->

	~~A spectrum of common human attitudes toward animals can be broadly arranged according to how frequently people make significant sacrifices to put the needs of animals ahead of their own needs.~~

	{\| class="hh-data-table"		{\| class="hh-data-table"
	\|+'''Fig. 1:''' ''Attitudinal Behavior Groups Organized by Frequency of Significant Sacrifice''		\|+'''Fig. 1:''' ''Attitudinal Behavior Groups Organized by Frequency of Significant Sacrifice''

Chris at 04:41, 12 August 2025

2025-08-12T04:41:41Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:41, 12 August 2025
Line 305:		Line 305:
	in animal welfare science 1984/85 (pp. 177-213). Washington, DC: The Humane Society of the United States. -->		in animal welfare science 1984/85 (pp. 177-213). Washington, DC: The Humane Society of the United States. -->

	=== Scope / Limitations / Caveats ===		==== Scope / Limitations / Caveats ====

	==== Soft science ====		===== Soft science =====

	==== Modern Western Society ====		===== Modern Western Society =====

	==== Species-Specific ====		===== Species-Specific =====

	==== Large Sacrifices ====		===== Large Sacrifices =====

	==== Self-Perception vs. Behavior ====		===== Self-Perception vs. Behavior =====

	===== Groups Mislabel Themselves =====		====== Groups Mislabel Themselves ======

	===== Behavior can be measured objectively =====		====== Behavior can be measured objectively ======

	===== Behavior can be inconsistent =====		====== Behavior can be inconsistent ======

	==== Contradictions / Conflicts ====		===== Contradictions / Conflicts =====

	===== Meat Eaters =====		====== Meat Eaters ======

	===== Hunters =====		====== Hunters ======

	=== Attitudes Toward Other Groups ===		==== Attitudes Toward Other Groups ====

	==== Everyone Else Is Crazy ====		===== Everyone Else Is Crazy =====

	==== Friendly Neighbors ====		===== Friendly Neighbors =====

	==== Frivolity and Insanity ====		===== Frivolity and Insanity =====

	== Applications ==		==== Applications ====

	=== More Effective Advocacy Strategies ===		===== More Effective Advocacy Strategies =====

	==== Attitude vs. Capabilities for Ideal Targets ====		====== Attitude vs. Capabilities for Ideal Targets ======

	==== What is an “Animal Lover?” ====		====== What is an “Animal Lover?” ======

	=== Nudging Up the Spectrum ===		===== Nudging Up the Spectrum =====

	=== Animal Architecture ===		===== Animal Architecture =====

	=== Generalization ===		===== Generalization =====

Chris: /* Unsorted */

2025-08-12T04:38:30Z

Unsorted

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:38, 12 August 2025
Line 300:		Line 300:
	* Extremist activists, such as those who commit terrorist acts against those they view as enemies of animals. militant		* Extremist activists, such as those who commit terrorist acts against those they view as enemies of animals. militant

	== ~~Unsorted~~ ==		== Future Development ==

			Kellert, S.R. (1984). American attitudes toward and knowledge of animals: An update. In M.W. Fox & L.D. Mickley (Eds.), Advances
			in animal welfare science 1984/85 (pp. 177-213). Washington, DC: The Humane Society of the United States. -->

	=== Scope / Limitations / Caveats ===		=== Scope / Limitations / Caveats ===

Chris: /* Designing for Animals */

2025-08-12T04:37:04Z

Designing for Animals

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:37, 12 August 2025
Line 23:		Line 23:
	===Designing for Animals===		===Designing for Animals===

	Designing an [[Animal-Supportive ~~Home~~\|animal-supportive home]] means adding yet another stakeholder to the already crowded mix.		Designing an [[Animal-Supportive Homes\|animal-supportive home]] means adding yet another stakeholder to the already crowded mix.

	However, animals are even more complicated, because although they live in and use the building, they cannot advocate for themselves or communicate the relative importance of various design options.		However, animals are even more complicated, because although they live in and use the building, they cannot advocate for themselves or communicate the relative importance of various design options.
Line 29:		Line 29:
	This means that architects either need to consult with animal experts or become experts themselves in order to have their needs accurately represented in the trade-off analysis.		This means that architects either need to consult with animal experts or become experts themselves in order to have their needs accurately represented in the trade-off analysis.

	~~Furhtermore~~, they also need to consider a wide range of human attitudes toward animals,		Furthermore, they also need to consider a wide range of human attitudes toward animals,
	from the few who say they don’t like animals at all, which is fairly straightforward, to the many who say they love them, which is harder to evaluate because when one person says it, they mean they like looking at photos of kittens online, but when another person says they love animals, they mean they jumped off a bridge into a raging river to save a rabbit they thought was in trouble and, despite nearly drowning, would do it again with no hesitation.		from the few who say they don’t like animals at all, which is fairly straightforward, to the many who say they love them, which is harder to evaluate because when one person says it, they mean they like looking at photos of kittens online, but when another person says they love animals, they mean they jumped off a bridge into a raging river to save a rabbit they thought was in trouble and, despite nearly drowning, would do it again with no hesitation.

	To weigh the needs of animals against the sacrifices of humans, architects need to know how people really feel about animals.		To weigh the needs of animals against the sacrifices of humans, architects need to know how people really feel about animals, and they can’t necessarily rely on their words. Unfortunately, the gold standard of research in this area, Kellert’s typology of nine basic attitudes toward animals, is not useful in this instance, as the typologies overlap and cannot be easily ranked.

	~~Unfortunately~~, ~~the gold standard of research in this area~~, ~~Kellert’s~~ typology of ~~nine basic~~ attitudes toward animals, ~~is not~~ useful ~~in this instance~~, as the ~~typologies overlap and cannot be easily ranked~~.		To make value judgments, what would be useful is a taxonomy, i.e., an empirically-derived, often hierarchical classification system, whereas a typology is a theoretically constructed system of grouping based on shared characteristics.
			A taxonomy of the attitudes humans most commonly exhibit toward animals, as measured through their observable actions, would help describe how people actually think and feel about them. This in turn would help foster understanding and organize discussion of the dynamics between individuals and groups with differing worldviews.
			Furthermore, since trade-off analyses depend on what different groups are willing to sacrifice for each other, it would be most useful to use, as an empirical measure, the amount humans typically sacrifice for animals in their daily lives as an accurate measure of their attitude toward them.

	To make value judgments, what would be useful is a taxonomy, i.e., an empirically-derived, often hierarchical classification system, whereas a typology is a theoretically constructed system of grouping based on shared characteristics.		Since a nomenclature describing groups in this manner could not be located, the following taxonomy was created.
			While reductive compared to Kellert’s comprehensive work in this area, this spectrum could be seen as a measurement of how strongly people identify with Kellert’s Humanistic attitude, which is strongly associated with the level of empathy people feel toward animals.
	Furthermore, since trade-off analyses depend on what different groups are willing to sacrifice for each other, it would be most useful to use, as the empirical measure, the amount humans typically sacrifice for animals in their daily lives as an accurate measure of their attitude toward them.		While such a taxonomy could contribute to anthrozoology and other social sciences, it could also benefit a variety of animal welfare causes.
			As most people who work for such causes do so outside of academia, the taxonomy was restricted to conventional terms so those terms could be more easily used in non-academic channels.
	Since a ~~suitable~~ nomenclature describing ~~such~~ groups could not be located, the following taxonomy was created.

	~~An informal taxonomy of the attitudes humans most commonly exhibit toward animals~~, as ~~measured through their observable actions~~, ~~would help describe how~~ people ~~actually think and~~ feel ~~about them. This in turn would help foster understanding and organize discussion of the dynamics between individuals and groups with differing worldviews~~.

	While such a taxonomy could contribute to anthrozoology and other social sciences, it could also benefit a variety of animal welfare causes. As most people who work for such causes do so outside of academia, ~~it would be useful to restrict~~ the taxonomy to conventional terms ~~and popularize~~ those terms ~~through~~ non-academic channels.

	~~Note: This spectrum could be seen as a measurement of how strongly people identify with Kellert’s Humanistic attitude, which is strongly associated with their level of empathy felt toward animals.~~


	~~<!--~~
	~~Since a suitable nomenclature describing such groups could not be located, the following taxonomy was created.~~
	~~To design animal-supportive architectural concepts, and especially to weigh their costs in terms of human needs~~
	~~While reductive compared to Kellert’s comprehensive work in this area,~~

	~~Kellert, S.R. (1984). American attitudes toward and knowledge of animals: An update. In M.W. Fox & L.D. Mickley (Eds.), Advances~~
	~~in animal welfare science 1984/85 (pp. 177-213). Washington, DC: The Humane Society of the United States. -->~~

	== The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum ==		== The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum ==

Chris: /* The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum */

2025-08-07T01:47:43Z

The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:47, 7 August 2025
Line 77:		Line 77:

	Could also just focus on the differential value, which suggests willingness to sacrifice		Could also just focus on the differential value, which suggests willingness to sacrifice
			Use candles to show ranges of values, because some, even just enthusaists, may value one animal above themselves, like parents with their kids vs all other kids

Chris: /* The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum */

2025-08-07T01:46:34Z

The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:46, 7 August 2025
Line 76:		Line 76:
	Fanatics 2 10		Fanatics 2 10

			Could also just focus on the differential value, which suggests willingness to sacrifice

Chris: /* The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum */

2025-08-07T01:45:55Z

The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:45, 7 August 2025
Line 58:		Line 58:

	== The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum ==		== The Animal Attitudinal Behavior Spectrum ==

			TO ADD: Introductory paragraph that dismisses the outliers at both ends of the spectrum, different kinds of unhealthily unbalanced.
			Then say where it gets interesting, in the middle, so the reader knows they can skip the abuser and go for the interesting part.
			Where it gets the most interesting is in the middle, where most people are -- we all love animals, but what does this really mean?
			Maybe reverse spectrum so zealot is first, less negavtive.


			TO ADD: Change sacrifice frequency metric, or add to it
			New Metric: Two points that represent the relative importance of humans or ones self wellbeing (big imbalance between self and rest of world indicates too much or too little self-importance), vs importance of animals wellbeing.
			Self Animal
			Abusers 10 0
			Avoiders 8 2-8 (depends on reasoning)
			Tolerators 8 4
			Enthusiasts 8 6
			Altruists 8 8
			Advocates 8 10 (still prioritize people in emergency?) (maybe humans are high, but self is low)
			Fanatics 2 10




	A spectrum of common human attitudes toward animals can be broadly arranged according to how frequently people make significant sacrifices to put the needs of animals ahead of their own needs.		A spectrum of common human attitudes toward animals can be broadly arranged according to how frequently people make significant sacrifices to put the needs of animals ahead of their own needs.

Chris: /* Designing for Animals */

2025-08-06T22:38:50Z

Designing for Animals

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:38, 6 August 2025
Line 30:		Line 30:

	Furhtermore, they also need to consider a wide range of human attitudes toward animals,		Furhtermore, they also need to consider a wide range of human attitudes toward animals,
	from the few who say they don’t like animals at all, which is fairly straightforward, to the many who say they love them, which is harder to evaluate because when one person says it, they mean they like looking at photos of kittens online, but when another person says they love animals, they mean they jumped off a ~~bright~~ into a raging river to save a rabbit they thought was in trouble and, despite nearly drowning, would do it again with no hesitation.		from the few who say they don’t like animals at all, which is fairly straightforward, to the many who say they love them, which is harder to evaluate because when one person says it, they mean they like looking at photos of kittens online, but when another person says they love animals, they mean they jumped off a bridge into a raging river to save a rabbit they thought was in trouble and, despite nearly drowning, would do it again with no hesitation.

	To weigh the needs of animals against the sacrifices of humans, architects need to know how people really feel about animals.		To weigh the needs of animals against the sacrifices of humans, architects need to know how people really feel about animals.

	Unfortunately, the gold standard of research in this area, Kellert’s typology nine basic attitudes toward animals, is not useful in this instance, as the typologies overlap and cannot be easily ranked.		Unfortunately, the gold standard of research in this area, Kellert’s typology of nine basic attitudes toward animals, is not useful in this instance, as the typologies overlap and cannot be easily ranked.

	To make value judgments, what would be useful is a taxonomy, i.e., an empirically-derived, often hierarchical classification system, whereas a typology is a theoretically constructed system of grouping based on shared characteristics.		To make value judgments, what would be useful is a taxonomy, i.e., an empirically-derived, often hierarchical classification system, whereas a typology is a theoretically constructed system of grouping based on shared characteristics.

	Furthermore, since trade-off analyses depend on what different groups are willing to sacrifice for each other, it would be most useful to use, as the empirical measure, the amount humans typically sacrifice for animals in their daily lives ~~in order to get a true~~ measure of their attitude toward them.		Furthermore, since trade-off analyses depend on what different groups are willing to sacrifice for each other, it would be most useful to use, as the empirical measure, the amount humans typically sacrifice for animals in their daily lives as an accurate measure of their attitude toward them.

	Since a suitable nomenclature describing such groups could not be located, the following taxonomy was created.		Since a suitable nomenclature describing such groups could not be located, the following taxonomy was created.