Ecological empathy

Last updated
Leaf heart.jpg

Ecological empathy, or eco-empathy, is empathy directed towards the natural world. It encompasses empathy directed towards animals, [1] plants, ecosystems, and the earth as a whole. [2]

Contents

Kim-Pong Tam developed a method of measuring individuals' dispositional empathy with nature (DEN), and has demonstrated its robust connection to conservation behavior. [3]

Numerous strategies can be implemented to cultivate ecological empathy—in both children and adults—including environmental education, [4] ecopedagogy, [5] arts, [6] literature, [7] film, [8] future scenarios, [9] ecological storytelling, [10] Indigenous approaches, [11] and parenting practices. [12]

Empathy for animals is a central component of eco-empathy, [13] and effective programs have been developed to promote empathy towards animals in the home, [14] in zoos [15] and aquariums, [16] on the farm, [17] and in the wild. [18]

Definitions

As defined by Wang et al., [2] “Empathy with nature means acknowledging the needs of animals, nature in general, and the importance of their survival, as well as showing interest in their well-being,” (Wang et al., 2022, p. 654). Ecological empathy overlaps with nature connectedness, and can be understood as the ability to connect with nature, both cognitively and affectively. [19]

Distinctions between ecological empathy and other concepts

Ecological empathy is related to, but distinct from, the concepts of biophilia, ecological grief, and solastalgia.

The biophilia hypothesis holds that humans possess an innate love of nature and a drive to connect with the natural world. [20] Biophilia refers to our affinity towards the natural world, whereas ecological empathy is our ability to feel empathy towards nature. Both are promoted by time spent in nature. [21]

While ecological empathy is an experience of empathy for nature, ecological grief (or climate grief) is the sadness that arises when one learns about environmental degradation and climate change. Related to ecological grief is solastalgia—a term coined by Glenn Albrecht [22] to describe the distress caused by changes to one’s environment while one is living in that environment (as opposed to nostalgia, which occurs when one is away from home.) It refers to the experience of current climate-related events (as opposed to eco-anxiety, which involves the fear of future climate-related events.) While ecological grief and solastalgia solely involve negative emotions related to nature, ecological empathy is about feeling the emotions of the natural world—either positive or negative. [2] [22]

Measurement

Ecological empathy can be assessed in various ways, and several scales have been created to assess individuals’ connection with and attitudes towards nature.

Dispositional Empathy with Nature (DEN) scale

Kim-Pong Tam [3] developed the Dispositional Empathy with Nature (DEN) scale, adapted from the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), [23] (a widely used empathy scale which measures both affective and cognitive empathy.) The DEN scale has been used by psychologists and educators in a variety of contexts since it was developed, to measure empathy towards nature in both students and adults, and has been translated and used internationally. [24]

Sample items of the Dispositional Empathy with Nature scale (Tam, 2013, p. 96) include: [3]

Emotional Affinity Toward Nature scale

Kals and colleagues designed the Emotional Affinity Toward Nature [25] scale to measure individuals’ affinity with and connection to the natural world. The scale contains three constructs, measuring participants’ behavior, emotions about nature, and experiences in nature—respectively. The scale has been used in the fields of psychology and education—primarily to assess students’ affinity toward nature, but has been used for adults as well. Sample items (Kals et al., 1999, pp. 188) from each construct include:

Environmental Attitudes Inventory (EAI)

Milfont & Duckitt designed The Environmental Attitudes Inventory (EAI) [26] to measure participants’ feelings, connection with, and attitudes about nature. The scale has been used internationally to measure students’ attitudes towards the environment, and has also been adapted and optimized in various contexts. [27] The inventory has twelve scales, each of which contains ten survey items (Milfont & Duckitt, 2010, pp. 91-92):

  1. Enjoyment of nature
  2. Support for interventionist conservation policies
  3. Environmental movement activism
  4. Conservation motivated by anthropocentric concern
  5. Confidence in science and technology
  6. Environmental threat
  7. Altering nature
  8. Personal conservation behaviour
  9. Human dominance over nature (items reverse coded)
  10. Human utilization of nature (items reverse coded)
  11. Eco-centric concern
  12. Support for population growth policies

Connectedness to nature scale

The connectedness to nature scale [28] designed by Mayer and Franz is a scale to measure individuals’ sense of connection with nature. The tool has been used primarily by psychologists and has been translated into other languages, including Cantonese [29] and French [30] for use in international contexts. Sample items (Mayer & Franz, 2004, p. 513) include:

Connection to conservation behavior

Across a number of studies, higher rates of ecological empathy have been found to correlate with increased conservation attitudes and behavior.

Tam [3] found that dispositional empathy with nature (DEN) robustly predicted both public (e.g. supporting an environmental organization) and private (e.g. household behaviors such as recycling) conservation behavior.

Ienna and colleagues in their study of 878 participants found that both empathy and knowledge of environmental issues predicted pro-environmental attitudes and behavior; though verifiable knowledge was a stronger predictor. [31] The authors also found a dissociation between cognitive and affective empathy—while affective empathy was found to predict attitudes but not behavior, cognitive empathy predicted both. This finding aligned with the authors’ prediction that cognitive empathy would influence behavior in a similar way as knowledge.

Wang and colleagues found that inducing empathy for nature (through photographs and videos) led to increased pro-environmental behaviors. [2] For individuals with independent (vs. interdependent) self-construal, however, higher empathy with nature did not lead to such behaviors. The study found that empathy towards nature led participants to make a commitment to the environment (a mediating factor), which in turn prompted increased environmental behavior.

Based on Daniel Batson’s Model of Altruism, Jaime Berenguer designed a study to test the effects of empathy on moral reasoning. Participants who were prompted to practice empathy when reading a passage about an environmental dilemma were able to construct significantly more moral arguments for their positions than those in the neutral condition. [32]

Ecological empathy has also been assessed in corporate settings. Islam and colleagues found that employees with high levels of empathy demonstrated more pro-environmental and conservation behavior, as well as higher levels of identification with their workplace in connection with its pro-environmental policies. [33]

Gary Lynne and colleagues found that “empathy nudging”, when combined with financial incentives, can have a powerful impact on farmers’ business decisions regarding sustainable agriculture. This is especially true for those who are initially low in conservation practices. [34]

Factors such as place and identity mediate the role of empathy in conservation behaviors. [35] Empathy will predict environmental actions only to the extent that it is able to transcend outgroup differences (natives vs. newcomers within a space) and geographic distance.

Individual differences

As with empathy generally, individuals vary in their ability and willingness to practice ecological empathy. [3]

Tam has defined the construct of Dispositional Empathy with Nature (DEN) to describe “the dispositional tendency to understand and share the emotional experience of the natural world, (Tam, 2013, p. 1). Tam has developed and validated an instrument for assessing DEN and found that, across five studies with over eight hundred participants, DEN predicted conservation behavior. [3]

Across the literature, gender is found to be a mediating factor for empathy, [36] [37] [3] with girls displaying greater ability and motivation to practice empathy.

Methods of cultivation

Empathy is teachable, [38] and numerous educational programs and interventions have been developed to foster ecological empathy, in both youth and adults.

Environmental education

Environmental education (EE) is a broad, multidisciplinary field that supports students’ engagement with nature, understanding of ecological systems, exploration of complex environmental problems, and the development of habits, lifestyles, and actions that promote conservation. [4]

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), “Environmental education is a process that allows individuals to explore environmental issues, engage in problem solving, and take action to improve the environment. As a result, individuals develop a deeper understanding of environmental issues and have the skills to make informed and responsible decisions”. [39]

The EPA lays out the following components of environmental education: [39]

David Sobel argues that environmental education should be focused on empathy between the ages of four and seven, as children in this age range have less of a distinction between “self” and “other” and can more easily empathize with others. [40]

Sobel encourages educators and parents to foster a love of nature by letting children engage in wild play—getting dirty, climbing trees, building forts, and immersing themselves in the natural world. He critiques environmental education which focus too much on rules and the cultivation of systemic knowledge, and argues that “Nature programs should invite children to make mud pies, climb trees, catch frogs, paint their faces with charcoal, get their hands dirty and their feet wet. They should be allowed to go off the trail and have fun”. [41]

Sobel calls for parents and educators to focus on fostering a connection with and love of nature first and foremost. In Beyond Ecophobia. Reclaiming the Heart in Nature Education, Sobel argues, “If we want children to flourish, to become truly empowered, let us allow them to love the earth before we ask them to save it.” [40]

Ecopedagogy

Ecopedagogy, as distinct from traditional environmental education, empowers students to explore the connections between social and environmental violence, to investigate the hidden political structures that contribute to environmental destruction, and—critically—to engage in transformational praxis. [5]

Ecopedagogy curricula can empower students to examine their own relationship with the natural world, the infrastructural privileges they may or may not have, and the ways in which the infrastructures around them were shaped by systems of power. [42]

Arts

Both making [6] and viewing [43] visual art have been used to promote ecological empathy. Notable environmental artists include Andy Goldworthy, Chris Jordan, Agnes Denes, and Clifford Ross. [44]

Music, dance, theater, and poetry are also used to promote ecological empathy. [45]

Literature

Children’s books can be used to promote ecological empathy [7] often featuring animals as central characters. [46] One such series is the Schoolyard Series [47] —a collection of children’s picture books developed by The National Science Foundation’s Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) network—with content reviewed by scientists and illustrations that engage readers and promote empathic connection.

Other popular environmental children’s books (as cited by Holm [48] ) include The Lorax, Washing the Willow Tree Loon, [49] Hoot [50] Flush, [51] The Wheel on the School, The Missing 'Gator of Gumbo Limbo, [52] The Empty Lot, [53] The Great Kapok Tree, Just a Dream, [54] and The Forever Forest: Kids Save a Tropical Treasure. [55]

For adult readers, the genre of climate fiction can promote empathy and reflection by strengthening readers’ ecological imagination skills. [56] In her book, Affective Ecologies, Alexa Weik von Mossner argues that the embodied cognition elicited by environmental narratives allows readers to empathize, understand, and connect with ecological issues and human-nature relationships in a profound way. [57]

Film

Numerous films have been created to draw attention to current environmental issues and promote ecological empathy among audiences. Notable examples are: The 11th Hour, Angry Inuk , Anthropocene: The Human Epoch , Food, Inc. , An Inconvenient Truth , The Cove , The Redwoods , The Story of Stuff, and The True Cost . [8]

Future scenarios

Future scenarios can be used to elicit empathy for the environment and can be implemented in several ways. Jessica Blythe and colleagues studied the use of future scenarios about the ocean (presented in either written or virtual reality format) and found post-empathy levels to be significantly higher in both conditions. [9]

Pessimistic scenarios tend to elicit more empathy, [9] though optimistic scenarios tend to promote empowerment. [58]

Scenario Art involves the presentation of visual representations of future scenarios alongside a process of strategic questioning—designed to foster provoke empathy, creativity, and sustainable decision-making. [59]

Future scenarios have also been used in museums to help visitors imagine the impact of various ecological solutions on future life. [60]

Ecological storytelling

Participatory ecological storytelling promotes ecological empathy by having participants co-create environmental stories using both human and animal characters. Projecting and combining their own emotions with that of their characters, storytelling participants can develop empathy for environmental actors and the planet itself. Through their stories, participants engage in a critical self-reflective process and imagine possibilities for the construction of a sustainable future. This tool has been used with both broad range of participants, including youth, professional designers, and business stakeholders. [10]

Indigenous approaches

Educators can also promote empathy through the integration of indigenous practices into the curricula. Activities are designed to help children connect with and understand themselves, first and foremost, connecting with others to better understand their perspectives, and helping students make meaningful connections between what they’re learning and their own lives. Indigenous stories, time spent outdoors to play freely with one another, and the building of relationship provide a foundation for empathic learning. [11]

Indigenous learning is not only a cognitive process but also a social and emotional process, as the transfer of learning often happens through intergenerational relationships. In many Indigenous cultures, environmental knowledge is passed on through siblings, peers, and elders—through storytelling and powerful rituals and ceremonies (in contrast to the traditional lecture format of modern schools). [61]

Indigenous storytelling can play a powerful role in the cultivation of ecological empathy. Celidwen and Keltner explain, “Indigenous Peoples recover and recontextualize stories in ongoing co-creation and participation, thus strengthening identity and purpose, and restoring community bonds. These stories, still oriented toward reverence to all living forms, encourage empathy and perspective taking, bringing individuals into resilient and adaptive communities.” [62]

Parenting practices

Parents can also play a powerful role in promoting ecological empathy with their children. In Rachel Carson’s book, The Sense of Wonder, writes about her adventures with her grandnephew who—through his sense of wonder—helps her discover the natural world all over again. Carson encourages parents to provide children with companionship as they discover the joy and beauty of nature. [12]

Empathy for animals

A central component of ecological empathy is the empathy felt towards non-human animals. [13]

One main motivation for nurturing children’s capacity to empathize with animals is based on the concept of transference , whereby the empathic skills they develop for animals will result in an increased ability to empathize with humans. [63]

Indeed, research suggests that developing empathy for animals may support the development of empathy toward other humans and—on the flip side—engaging in acts of cruelty toward animals may predict antisocial and violent behavior towards other humans. [64] In their study of 23 school shooters between 1988 and 2012, Arluke and Madfis found 43% of them had a history of abusing animals. [65]

Humane education and nature education programs have been used as an effective intervention to promote empathy towards animals—in the zoo, at home, on the farm, or in the wild.

Animals in zoos and aquariums

Wharton et al. [16] have identified six practices adults can use with children to support their empathy towards marine life:

Sarah Webber and colleagues found that zoo visitors observing orangutans interacting with a digital interface (projected on the floor of their enclosure) responded with cognitive, affective, and motor empathy towards the orangutans. The interactive projection offered orangutans the opportunity to create artwork, play interactive games, view videos, and identify themselves in photographs. The exhibit was designed to build empathy by allowing visitors to observe the animals’ behaviors up-close, witness their cognitive capacity in action, and observe differences in individual animals' preferences and behaviors. [15]

In their small-scale evaluation of a zoo-based nature preschool, Ernst and Budnik found that children’s levels of empathy towards both humans and animals increased over the course of the school year. For wild animals, they found significant increases in emotional sharing and empathic concern, but not in the cognitive (perspective-taking) component. [66]

Companion animals

Khalid and Naqvi found that individuals reporting strong "pet attachment" had higher levels of empathy. [67] This finding was corroborated by Daly and Morton, who found that children who were highly attached to their pets were more empathic than those who were less attached. Daly and Morton also found that children who preferred both cats and dogs (as opposed to one or the other)—as well as those who owned both—were more empathic than those who preferred or owned only one. [68]

Robert Poresky found that children’s empathy towards other children was correlated with their empathy towards pets. He also found that children with a stronger pet bond scored higher on the measure of empathy towards other children. [69]

Rothgerber and Mican found that individuals who reported having a close relationship with animals subsequently avoided meat more than those who didn’t, and used indirect, apologetic justifications for the meat they did eat. Both effects were mediated by empathy for animals. [70]

A growing body of research suggests that humane education programs, especially those involving human-animal interactions, facilitates the development of empathy in children. [14] [71] [63] Humane education programs can also be used as an effective strategy to combat school violence—reducing aggression towards both humans and animals. [72] [73]

Farmed animals

Psychologist Melanie Joy, who coined the term carnism, [74] [75] studies the psychology of eating meat and the “meat paradox,” which refers to the fact that most people simultaneously care about animals and consume them. A growing number of researchers are studying this phenomenon in attempt to understand what factors play a role in this paradox. Piazza and colleagues identified what they refer to as the “4Ns” individuals use to justify meat consumption: Necessary, Natural, Normal, and Nice. [76]

Research by Loughnan and colleagues suggests that people who value masculinity, find dominance and inequality acceptable, view animals as highly dissimilar to humans, or think that animals cannot feel pain are more likely to eat meat. [77]

Megan Earle and colleagues found that providing visual reminders of the animal origins of meat (compared to photos of the meat alone) lead to decreased meat consumption, which was mediated by increased empathy towards animals, distress about meat consumption, and disgust for meat. The intervention also led to a decrease in negative attitudes towards vegetarians and vegans. [78]

In their meta-analysis of 100 studies evaluating interventions designed to reduce meat consumption, Mathur and colleagues found that appeals to animal welfare were largely successful in achieving at least a short-term reduction in meat consumption, based on self-report behavioral outcomes and intentions for future behavior. [79]

While self-reported measures of empathy may be susceptible to social desirability bias and other validity issues, analysis of facial expressions can be a more objective measure. Ly and Weary found that facial expressions were able to robustly predict empathy towards farm animals when participants viewed videos of animals undergoing painful procedures associated with industrial farming. [80]

In a study of dairy farmers, lack of empathy towards animals (as indicated by disagreement with the statement: “animals experience physical pain as humans do”) was correlated with higher numbers of skin lesions in the farmers’ cows. [81]

Organizations such as the New Roots Institute, The Humane League, Humane Society of the United States, Farm Sanctuary, Mercy for Animals, and others educate youth and the broader public about the impact of factory farming, in an attempt to promote empathy for farmed animals. [82] [83]

Wild animals

With the rise of globalization and transnational trade, both legal and illegal wildlife trade has proliferated. [84] Dan Yue and colleagues designed educational materials including texts depicting the poaching of animals in an anthropomorphic way, such as one written from the perspective of a tiger cub whose mother was killed by poachers. [18] These anthropomorphic educational materials boosted participants’ empathy towards wildlife and their intention to avoid consuming wildlife products, such as tiger bone wine..

Kansky and Maassarani found that the implementation of non-violent communication (NVC) workshops led to greater empathic concern for both people and wildlife in Namibia. [85]

Ashley Young and colleagues offer best practices for cultivating children’s empathic connection for animals, including: [86]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Speciesism</span> Discrimination against non-human creatures solely on the basis of their species membership

Speciesism is a term used in philosophy regarding the treatment of individuals of different species. The term has several different definitions within the relevant literature. Some sources specifically define speciesism as discrimination or unjustified treatment based on an individual's species membership, while other sources define it as differential treatment without regard to whether the treatment is justified or not. Richard Ryder, who coined the term, defined it as "a prejudice or attitude of bias in favour of the interests of members of one's own species and against those of members of other species." Speciesism results in the belief that humans have the right to use non-human animals, which scholars say is pervasive in the modern society. Studies from 2015 and 2019 suggest that people who support animal exploitation also tend to endorse racist, sexist, and other prejudicial views, which furthers the beliefs in human supremacy and group dominance to justify systems of inequality and oppression.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nature conservation</span> Movement to protect the biosphere

Nature conservation is the moral philosophy and conservation movement focused on protecting species from extinction, maintaining and restoring habitats, enhancing ecosystem services, and protecting biological diversity. A range of values underlie conservation, which can be guided by biocentrism, anthropocentrism, ecocentrism, and sentientism, environmental ideologies that inform ecocultural practices and identities. There has recently been a movement towards evidence-based conservation which calls for greater use of scientific evidence to improve the effectiveness of conservation efforts. As of 2018 15% of land and 7.3% of the oceans were protected. Many environmentalists set a target of protecting 30% of land and marine territory by 2030. In 2021, 16.64% of land and 7.9% of the oceans were protected. The 2022 IPCC report on climate impacts and adaptation, underlines the need to conserve 30% to 50% of the Earth's land, freshwater and ocean areas – echoing the 30% goal of the U.N.'s Convention on Biodiversity. Ultimately, these movements should be further promoted to encourage biodiversity and to conserve a functional ecosystem.

In the field of psychology, cognitive dissonance is the perception of contradictory information and the mental toll of it. Relevant items of information include a person's actions, feelings, ideas, beliefs, values, and things in the environment. Cognitive dissonance is typically experienced as psychological stress when persons participate in an action that goes against one or more of those things. According to this theory, when two actions or ideas are not psychologically consistent with each other, people do all in their power to change them until they become consistent. The discomfort is triggered by the person's belief clashing with new information perceived, wherein the individual tries to find a way to resolve the contradiction to reduce their discomfort.

Anthropocentrism is the belief that human beings are the central or most important entity in the universe. The term can be used interchangeably with humanocentrism, and some refer to the concept as human supremacy or human exceptionalism. From an anthropocentric perspective, humankind is seen as separate from nature and superior to it, and other entities are viewed as resources for humans to use. Eating Animals, a novel written by Jonathan Foer, describes anthropocentrism as "The conviction that humans are the pinnacle of evolution, the appropriate yardstick by which to measure the lives of other animals, and the rightful owners of everything that lives." This quote exemplifies the deeper meaning behind his novel: how human beings are overtaking the animal industry, which is being overshadowed by financial and personal gain. Human instincts, such as anthropocentrism, have refined the meat industry to many inhumane and unethical practices. Human projection onto animals tend to be unethical. This is because humans see themselves as superior over animals, which can be used as an example of anthropocentrism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Empathy</span> Capacity to understand or feel what another person is experiencing

Empathy is generally described as the ability to take on another's perspective, to understand, feel and possibly share and respond to their experience. There are more definitions of empathy that include but is not limited to social, cognitive, and emotional processes primarily concerned with understanding others. Often times, empathy is considered to be a broad term, and broken down into more specific concepts and types that include cognitive empathy, emotional empathy, somatic empathy, and spiritual empathy.

Applied psychology is the use of psychological methods and findings of scientific psychology to solve practical problems of human and animal behavior and experience. Educational and organizational psychology, business management, law, health, product design, ergonomics, behavioural psychology, psychology of motivation, psychoanalysis, neuropsychology, psychiatry and mental health are just a few of the areas that have been influenced by the application of psychological principles and scientific findings. Some of the areas of applied psychology include counseling psychology, industrial and organizational psychology, engineering psychology, occupational health psychology, legal psychology, school psychology, sports psychology, community psychology, neuropsychology, medical psychology and clinical psychology, evolutionary psychology, human factors, forensic psychology and traffic psychology. In addition, a number of specialized areas in the general area of psychology have applied branches. However, the lines between sub-branch specializations and major applied psychology categories are often mixed or in some cases blurred. For example, a human factors psychologist might use a cognitive psychology theory. This could be described as human factor psychology or as applied cognitive psychology. When applied psychology is used in the treatment of behavioral disorders there are many experimental approaches to try and treat an individual. This type of psychology can be found in many of the subbranches in other fields of psychology.

Comparative psychology refers to the scientific study of the behavior and mental processes of non-human animals, especially as these relate to the phylogenetic history, adaptive significance, and development of behavior. The phrase comparative psychology may be employed in a narrow and a broad meaning. In its narrow meaning, it refers to the study of the similarities and differences in the psychology and behavior of different species. In a broader meaning, comparative psychology includes comparisons between different biological and socio-cultural groups, such as species, sexes, developmental stages, ages, and ethnicities. Research in this area addresses many different issues, uses many different methods and explores the behavior of many different species from insects to primates.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Human behavior</span> Array of every physical action and observable emotion associated with humans

Human behavior is the potential and expressed capacity of human individuals or groups to respond to internal and external stimuli throughout their life. Behavior is driven by genetic and environmental factors that affect an individual. Behavior is also driven, in part, by thoughts and feelings, which provide insight into individual psyche, revealing such things as attitudes and values. Human behavior is shaped by psychological traits, as personality types vary from person to person, producing different actions and behavior.

Sex differences in psychology are differences in the mental functions and behaviors of the sexes and are due to a complex interplay of biological, developmental, and cultural factors. Differences have been found in a variety of fields such as mental health, cognitive abilities, personality, emotion, sexuality, and tendency towards aggression. Such variation may be innate, learned, or both. Modern research attempts to distinguish between these causes and to analyze any ethical concerns raised. Since behavior is a result of interactions between nature and nurture, researchers are interested in investigating how biology and environment interact to produce such differences, although this is often not possible.

Environmental psychology is a branch of psychology that explores the relationship between humans and the external world. It examines the way in which the natural environment and our built environments shape us as individuals. Environmental psychology emphasizes how humans change the environment and how the environment changes humans' experiences and behaviors. The field defines the term environment broadly, encompassing natural environments, social settings, built environments, learning environments, and informational environments. According to an article on APA Psychnet, environmental psychology is when a person thinks of a plan, travels to a certain place, and follows through with the plan throughout their behavior.

Social dominance orientation (SDO) is a personality trait measuring an individual's support for social hierarchy and the extent to which they desire their in-group be superior to out-groups. SDO is conceptualized under social dominance theory as a measure of individual differences in levels of group-based discrimination; that is, it is a measure of an individual's preference for hierarchy within any social system and the domination over lower-status groups. It is a predisposition toward anti-egalitarianism within and between groups.

Cultural psychology is the study of how cultures reflect and shape their members' psychological processes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Humane education</span> Education that nurtures compassion and respect for living beings

Humane education is broadly defined as education that nurtures compassion and respect for living beings In addition to focusing on the humane treatment of non-human animals, humane education also increasingly contains content related to the environment, the compassionate treatment of other people, and the interconnectedness of issues pertaining to people and the planet. Humane education encourages cognitive, affective, and behavioral growth through personal development of critical thinking, problem solving, perspective-taking, and empathy as it relates to people, animals, the planet, and the intersections among them. Education taught through the lens of humane pedagogy supports more than knowledge acquisition, it allows learners to process personal values and choose prosocial behaviors aligned with those values.

The connectedness to nature scale (CNS) is a measure of individuals' trait levels of feeling emotionally connected to the natural world in the realm of social and environmental psychology. The CNS was “designed to tap an individual’s affective, experiential connection to nature.” The concept of connectedness to nature signifies the relationship between an individual and the environment. In brief, the scale intends to measure the level to which an individual feels connected with the natural world. Mayer and Frantz describe the CNS as a reliable, single-factored, multi-item scale that is easy to administer.

Moral disengagement is a meaning from social psychology and Educational Psychology for the process of convincing the self that ethical standards do not apply to oneself in a particular context. This is done by separating moral reactions from inhumane conduct and disabling the mechanism of self-condemnation. Thus, moral disengagement involves a process of cognitive re-construing or re-framing of destructive behavior as being morally acceptable without changing the behavior or the moral standards.

Conservation psychology is the scientific study of the reciprocal relationships between humans and the rest of nature, with a particular focus on how to encourage conservation of the natural world. Rather than a specialty area within psychology itself, it is a growing field for scientists, researchers, and practitioners of all disciplines to come together and better understand the Earth and what can be done to preserve it. This network seeks to understand why humans hurt or help the environment and what can be done to change such behavior. The term "conservation psychology" refers to any fields of psychology that have understandable knowledge about the environment and the effects humans have on the natural world. Conservation psychologists use their abilities in "greening" psychology and make society ecologically sustainable. The science of conservation psychology is oriented toward environmental sustainability, which includes concerns like the conservation of resources, conservation of ecosystems, and quality of life issues for humans and other species.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nature connectedness</span>

Nature connectedness is the extent to which individuals include nature as part of their identity. It includes an understanding of nature and everything it is made up of, even the parts that are not pleasing. Characteristics of nature connectedness are similar to those of a personality trait: nature connectedness is stable over time and across various situations.

The psychology of eating meat is an area of study seeking to illuminate the confluence of morality, emotions, cognition, and personality characteristics in the phenomenon of the consumption of meat. Research into the psychological and cultural factors of meat-eating suggests correlations with masculinity, support for hierarchical values, and reduced openness to experience. Because meat eating is widely practiced but is sometimes associated with ambivalence, it has been used as a case study in moral psychology to illustrate theories of cognitive dissonance and moral disengagement. Research into the consumer psychology of meat is relevant both to meat industry marketing and to advocates of reduced meat consumption.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Machiavellianism (psychology)</span> Psychological trait

In the field of personality psychology, Machiavellianism is a personality trait characterized by interpersonal manipulation, indifference to morality, lack of empathy, and a strategic focus on self-interest. Psychologists Richard Christie and Florence Geis named the trait after Niccolò Machiavelli, as they used edited and truncated statements inspired by his works to study variations in human behaviors. Their Mach IV test, a 20-question, Likert-scale personality survey, became the standard self-assessment tool and scale of the Machiavellianism construct. Those who score high on the scale are more likely to have a high level of deceitfulness and a cynical, unemotional temperament.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Campbell paradigm</span> Behavioral theory in social psychology

The Campbell paradigm is a behavioral theory from social psychology. The paradigm was developed by social psychologist Florian G. Kaiser and his colleagues in 2010, building on an earlier suggestion by Donald T. Campbell, after whom the paradigm is named. It offers an explanation for why and when individuals engage in particular behaviors. It is mainly applied to behaviors that are aimed at fighting climate change and protecting the environment.

References

  1. ↑ Figueredo, Aurelio José; Steklis, Netzin Gerald; Peñaherrera-Aguirre, Mateo; Fernandes, Heitor Barcellos Ferreira; de, Tomás Cabeza; Salmon, Catherine; Chaves, María Gabriela Hernández; Araya, Siu Fong Acón; Pérez-Ramos, Marisol; Armenta, Martha Frías; Verdugo, Víctor Corral; Aragonés, Juan Ignacio; Sevillano, Verónica (2022-11-23). "The influence of individual differences and local ecological conditions on emotional empathy, cognitive empathy, and harm avoidance towards nonhuman animals". Human-Animal Interactions. doi:10.1079/hai.2022.0021. ISSN   2957-9538. S2CID   253863658.
  2. 1 2 3 4 Wang, Litong; Sheng, Guanghua; She, Shengxiang; Xu, Jiaqi (2022-08-06). "Impact of empathy with nature on pro‐environmental behaviour". International Journal of Consumer Studies. 47 (2): 652–668. doi:10.1111/ijcs.12856. ISSN   1470-6423. S2CID   251148144.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Tam, Kim-Pong (September 2013). "Dispositional empathy with nature". Journal of Environmental Psychology. 35: 92–104. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.05.004. ISSN   0272-4944.
  4. 1 2 Lotz-Sisitka, Heila; Fien, John; Ketlhoilwe, Mphemelang (2013-05-02), "20 Traditions and New Niches", International Handbook of Research on Environmental Education, Routledge, pp. 194–205, doi:10.4324/9780203813331-36, ISBN   978-0-203-81333-1 , retrieved 2023-11-24
  5. 1 2 Misiaszek, Greg (2020). Ecopedagogy: Critical Environmental Teaching for Planetary Justice and Global Sustainable Development. London, UK: Bloomsbury Publishing.
  6. 1 2 Sunassee, Asvina; Bokhoree, Chandradeo; Patrizio, Andrew (2021-05-20). "Students' Empathy for the Environment through Eco-Art Place-Based Education: A Review". Ecologies. 2 (2): 214–247. doi: 10.3390/ecologies2020013 . ISSN   2673-4133.
  7. 1 2 McKnight, Diane M (August 2010). "Overcoming "ecophobia": fostering environmental empathy through narrative in children's science literature". Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 8 (6). Bibcode:2010FrEE....8E..10M. doi: 10.1890/100041 . ISSN   1540-9295.
  8. 1 2 Kong, Charmaine (2023-10-22). "The 21 Best Environmental Films of 2023". Earth.Org. Retrieved 2023-11-30.
  9. 1 2 3 Blythe, Jessica; Baird, Julia; Bennett, Nathan; Dale, Gillian; Nash, Kirsty L.; Pickering, Gary; Wabnitz, Colette C. C. (2021-09-04). "Fostering ocean empathy through future scenarios". People and Nature. 3 (6): 1284–1296. Bibcode:2021PeoNa...3.1284B. doi:10.1002/pan3.10253. ISSN   2575-8314. S2CID   239074200.
  10. 1 2 Talgorn, Elise; Ullerup, Helle (2023-05-10). "Invoking 'Empathy for the Planet' through Participatory Ecological Storytelling: From Human-Centered to Planet-Centered Design". Sustainability. 15 (10): 7794. doi: 10.3390/su15107794 . ISSN   2071-1050.
  11. 1 2 Ly, R. (2014). "Beyond strategies: Infusing empathy and indigenous approaches in the elementary classroom". University of Toronto TSpace Repository.
  12. 1 2 Carson, Rachel (1998). The sense of wonder (1st ed.). HarperCollins Publishers.
  13. 1 2 Moran, Stephanie (2022). "What can art do for ecological thinking?" (PDF). The Ecological Citizen. 5 (2): 103–108.
  14. 1 2 Jalongo, Mary Renck (2013-06-21), "Humane Education and the Development of Empathy in Early Childhood: Definitions, Rationale, and Outcomes", Teaching Compassion: Humane Education in Early Childhood, Educating the Young Child, vol. 8, Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, pp. 3–21, doi:10.1007/978-94-007-6922-9_1, ISBN   978-94-007-6921-2 , retrieved 2023-11-24
  15. 1 2 Webber, Sarah; Carter, Marcus; Sherwen, Sally; Smith, Wally; Joukhadar, Zaher; Vetere, Frank (2017-05-02). "Kinecting with Orangutans: Zoo Visitors' Empathetic Responses to Animals' Use of Interactive Technology". Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York, NY, USA: ACM. pp. 6075–6088. doi:10.1145/3025453.3025729. ISBN   9781450346559. S2CID   12401656.
  16. 1 2 Wharton, Jim; Khalil, Kathayoon; Fyfe, Catie; Young, Ashley (2018-06-29), "Effective Practices for Fostering Empathy Towards Marine Life", Exemplary Practices in Marine Science Education, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 157–168, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-90778-9_10, ISBN   978-3-319-90777-2, S2CID   150021484 , retrieved 2023-11-24
  17. ↑ Mathur, Maya B; Peacock, Jacob; Reichling, David; Nadler, Janice; Bain, Paul; Gardner, Christopher D; Robinson, Thomas (2021-04-21). "Interventions to reduce meat consumption by appealing to animal welfare: Meta-analysis and evidence-based recommendations". Appetite. 164. doi:10.31219/osf.io/bc2wy. PMC   9205607 . PMID   33984401 . Retrieved 2023-12-10.
  18. 1 2 Yue, Dan; Tong, Zepeng; Tian, Jianchi; Li, Yang; Zhang, Linxiu; Sun, Yan (2021-03-30). "Anthropomorphic Strategies Promote Wildlife Conservation through Empathy: The Moderation Role of the Public Epidemic Situation". International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 18 (7): 3565. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18073565 . ISSN   1660-4601. PMC   8037496 . PMID   33808181.
  19. ↑ Fido, Dean; Richardson, Miles (June 2019). "Empathy Mediates the Relationship Between Nature Connectedness and Both Callous and Uncaring Traits". Ecopsychology. 11 (2): 130–137. doi: 10.1089/eco.2018.0071 . ISSN   1942-9347.
  20. ↑ WILSON, EDWARD O. (2009-06-30). Biophilia. Harvard University Press. doi:10.2307/j.ctvk12s6h. ISBN   978-0-674-04523-1.
  21. ↑ Berto, Rita; Barbiero, Giuseppe; Barbiero, Pietro; Senes, Giulio (2018-03-05). "An Individual's Connection to Nature Can Affect Perceived Restorativeness of Natural Environments. Some Observations about Biophilia". Behavioral Sciences. 8 (3): 34. doi: 10.3390/bs8030034 . ISSN   2076-328X. PMC   5867487 . PMID   29510581.
  22. 1 2 Albrecht, Glen (2005). "'Solastalgia'. A new concept in health and identity". PAN: Philosophy Activism Nature. 3: 41–55.
  23. ↑ Davis, Mark H. (1980). "Interpersonal Reactivity Index". PsycTESTS Dataset. doi:10.1037/t01093-000 . Retrieved 2023-11-24.
  24. ↑ Clayton, Susan; Irkhin, Boris; Nartova-Bochaver, Sof'ya (2019-03-30). "Environmental Identity in Russia: Validation and Relationship to the Concern for People and Plants". Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики. 16 (1): 85–107. doi: 10.17323/1813-8918-2019-1-85-107 . ISSN   1813-8918.
  25. ↑ Kals, Elisabeth; Schumacher, Daniel; Montada, Leo (March 1999). "Emotional Affinity toward Nature as a Motivational Basis to Protect Nature". Environment and Behavior. 31 (2): 178–202. Bibcode:1999EnvBe..31..178K. doi:10.1177/00139169921972056. ISSN   0013-9165. S2CID   143948653.
  26. ↑ Milfont, Taciano L.; Duckitt, John (March 2010). "The environmental attitudes inventory: A valid and reliable measure to assess the structure of environmental attitudes". Journal of Environmental Psychology. 30 (1): 80–94. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.09.001. ISSN   0272-4944.
  27. ↑ Sutton, Stephen G.; Gyuris, Emma (2015-01-05). "Optimizing the environmental attitudes inventory". International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. 16 (1): 16–33. Bibcode:2015IJSHE..16...16S. doi:10.1108/ijshe-03-2013-0027. ISSN   1467-6370.
  28. ↑ Mayer, F.Stephan; Frantz, Cynthia McPherson (December 2004). "The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals' feeling in community with nature". Journal of Environmental Psychology. 24 (4): 503–515. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.10.001. ISSN   0272-4944. S2CID   1144969.
  29. ↑ Cheung, Hubert; Mazerolle, Lorraine; Possingham, Hugh P.; Tam, Kim‐Pong; Biggs, Duan (September 2020). "A methodological guide for translating study instruments in cross‐cultural research: Adapting the 'connectedness to nature' scale into Chinese". Methods in Ecology and Evolution. 11 (11): 1379–1387. Bibcode:2020MEcEv..11.1379C. doi:10.1111/2041-210x.13465. ISSN   2041-210X. S2CID   225424348.
  30. ↑ Navarro, Oscar; Olivos, Pablo; Fleury-Bahi, Ghozlane (2017-12-12). ""Connectedness to Nature Scale": Validity and Reliability in the French Context". Frontiers in Psychology. 8: 2180. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02180 . ISSN   1664-1078. PMC   5733057 . PMID   29312052.
  31. ↑ Ienna, Marina; Rofe, Amelia; Gendi, Monica; Douglas, Heather E.; Kelly, Michelle; Hayward, Matthew W.; Callen, Alex; Klop-Toker, Kaya; Scanlon, Robert J.; Howell, Lachlan G.; Griffin, Andrea S. (2022-04-12). "The Relative Role of Knowledge and Empathy in Predicting Pro-Environmental Attitudes and Behavior". Sustainability. 14 (8): 4622. doi: 10.3390/su14084622 . hdl: 10536/DRO/DU:30166990 . ISSN   2071-1050.
  32. ↑ Berenguer, Jaime (2008-12-02). "The Effect of Empathy in Environmental Moral Reasoning". Environment and Behavior. 42 (1): 110–134. doi:10.1177/0013916508325892. ISSN   0013-9165. S2CID   143878638.
  33. ↑ Islam, Talat; Ali, Ghulam; Asad, Humaira (2019-03-18). "Environmental CSR and pro-environmental behaviors to reduce environmental dilapidation". Management Research Review. 42 (3): 332–351. doi:10.1108/mrr-12-2017-0408. ISSN   2040-8269. S2CID   150339615.
  34. ↑ Lynne, Gary D.; Czap, Natalia V.; Czap, Hans J.; Burbach, Mark E. (2016-12-23). "A Theoretical Foundation for Empathy Conservation: Toward Avoiding the Tragedy of the Commons". Review of Behavioral Economics. 3 (3–4): 243–279. doi:10.1561/105.00000052. ISSN   2326-6198.
  35. ↑ Brown, Katrina; Adger, W. Neil; Devine-Wright, Patrick; Anderies, John M.; Barr, Stewart; Bousquet, Francois; Butler, Catherine; Evans, Louisa; Marshall, Nadine; Quinn, Tara (May 2019). "Empathy, place and identity interactions for sustainability". Global Environmental Change. 56: 11–17. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.03.003. ISSN   0959-3780. S2CID   159299883.
  36. ↑ Rose, Amanda J.; Rudolph, Karen D. (January 2006). "A review of sex differences in peer relationship processes: Potential trade-offs for the emotional and behavioral development of girls and boys". Psychological Bulletin. 132 (1): 98–131. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.1.98. ISSN   1939-1455. PMC   3160171 . PMID   16435959.
  37. ↑ Chen, Wuying; Lu, Jiamei; Liu, Lianqi; Lin, Wenyi (2014). "Gender Differences of Empathy". Advances in Psychological Science. 22 (9): 1423. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2014.01423 . ISSN   1671-3710.
  38. ↑ Platt, Frederic W.; Keller, Vaughn F. (April 1994). "Empathic communication". Journal of General Internal Medicine. 9 (4): 222–226. doi:10.1007/bf02600129. ISSN   0884-8734. PMID   8014729. S2CID   42768114.
  39. 1 2 Environmental Protection Agency (November 11, 2023). "What is Environmental Education?". Environmental Protection Agency.
  40. 1 2 Sobel, David (2013). Beyond Ecophobia. Reclaiming the Heart in Nature Education. Great Barrington, MA, USA: The Orion Society.
  41. ↑ Sobel, David. "Look, Don't Touch". Orion Magazine. Retrieved 2023-11-24.
  42. ↑ Niess, Andrew; Knittle, Davy (2022-07-21), "Composing with Infrastructures", Ecopedagogies, London: Routledge, pp. 17–31, doi:10.4324/9781003221807-2, ISBN   978-1-003-22180-7 , retrieved 2023-11-24
  43. ↑ Pulsinelli, Gabryella (2019). The Role of Art in Creating Empathy for Nature. Wake Forest University.
  44. ↑ "7 Environmental Artists Fighting for Change | Widewalls". www.widewalls.ch. Retrieved 2023-11-30.
  45. ↑ Curtis, David J. (2009-11-24). "Creating inspiration: The role of the arts in creating empathy for ecological restoration". Ecological Management & Restoration. 10 (3): 174–184. Bibcode:2009EcoMR..10..174C. doi:10.1111/j.1442-8903.2009.00487.x. ISSN   1442-7001.
  46. ↑ Kucirkova, Natalia (2019-02-05). "How Could Children's Storybooks Promote Empathy? A Conceptual Framework Based on Developmental Psychology and Literary Theory". Frontiers in Psychology. 10: 121. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00121 . ISSN   1664-1078. PMC   6370723 . PMID   30804833.
  47. ↑ LTER Network (November 24, 2023). "LTER Schoolyard Series". National Science Foundation LTER (Long Term Ecological Research) Network.
  48. ↑ Holm, D. (2012). "Exploring environmental empathy in action with children's books". Reading Improvement. 49 (4): 134–139.
  49. ↑ Martin, J. B. (1995). Washing the Willow Tree Loon. Simon & Schuster Books for Young Readers.
  50. ↑ Hiaasen (2005). Hoot. Yearling.
  51. ↑ Hiaasen, C. (2007). Flush. Ember.
  52. ↑ George, J.C. (1992). The Missing 'Gator of Gumbo Limbo. Harpercollins Childrens Books.
  53. ↑ Fife, D (1991). The Empty Lot. Turtleback.
  54. ↑ Van Allsburg, C (1990). Just a Dream. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
  55. ↑ Pratt-Serafini, R.H.; Crandell, R. (2008). The Forever Forest: Kids Save a Tropical Treasure. Dawn Publications.
  56. ↑ Milkoreit, Manjana (2016-02-05), "The promise of climate fiction", Reimagining Climate Change, Abingdon, Oxon : Routledge, Earthscan, 2016.: Routledge, pp. 171–191, doi:10.4324/9781315671468-10, ISBN   9781315671468 , retrieved 2023-11-24{{citation}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
  57. ↑ von Mossner, Alexa Weik (2017-05-16). Affective Ecologies. Ohio State University Press. doi:10.2307/j.ctv11hpszq. ISBN   978-0-8142-7493-4.
  58. ↑ Richter, Isabell; Sumeldan, Joel; Avillanosa, Arlene; Gabe-Thomas, Elizabeth; Creencia, Lota; Pahl, Sabine (2021-11-22). "Co-created Future Scenarios as a Tool to Communicate Sustainable Development in Coastal Communities in Palawan, Philippines". Frontiers in Psychology. 12. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.627972 . ISSN   1664-1078. PMC   8645572 . PMID   34880799.
  59. ↑ Lederwasch, Aleta (2011). "Scenario Art as a Decision-making Tool to Facilitate Sustainable Futures". The International Journal of the Arts in Society: Annual Review. 6 (3): 153–166. doi:10.18848/1833-1866/cgp/v06i03/36048. ISSN   1833-1866.
  60. ↑ Garner, Julie; Rossmanith, Eva (2021-01-02). "Using Participation and Empathy to Inspire Positive Change: A Transcontinental Conversation". Journal of Museum Education. 46 (1): 48–60. doi:10.1080/10598650.2020.1852491. ISSN   1059-8650. S2CID   232125003.
  61. ↑ Kopnina, Helen (2012). Anthropology of environmental education. Nova Science Publisher's, Incorporated.
  62. ↑ Celidwen, Yuria; Keltner, Dacher (2023-10-20). "Kin relationality and ecological belonging: a cultural psychology of Indigenous transcendence". Frontiers in Psychology. 14: 8. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.994508 . ISSN   1664-1078. PMC   10622976 . PMID   37928574.
  63. 1 2 Thompson, Kelly L.; Gullone, Eleonora (2003-01-01). "Promotion of empathy and prosocial behaviour in children through humane education". Australian Psychologist. 38 (3): 175–182. doi:10.1080/00050060310001707187. ISSN   0005-0067.
  64. ↑ Komorosky, Dawna; O’Neal, Keri K. (2015-10-02). "The development of empathy and prosocial behavior through humane education, restorative justice, and animal-assisted programs". Contemporary Justice Review. 18 (4): 395–406. doi:10.1080/10282580.2015.1093684. ISSN   1028-2580. S2CID   146610403.
  65. ↑ Arluke, Arnold; Madfis, Eric (February 2014). "Animal Abuse as a Warning Sign of School Massacres: A Critique and Refinement". Homicide Studies. 18 (1): 7–22. doi:10.1177/1088767913511459. ISSN   1088-7679. S2CID   145456051.
  66. ↑ Ernst, J.; Budnik, L. (2022). "Fostering Empathy for People and Animals: An Evaluation of Lake Superior Zoo's Nature Preschool". International Journal of Early Childhood Environmental Education. 9 (2): 3–16.
  67. ↑ Khalid, A.; Naqvi, I. (2016). "Relationship between pet attachment and empathy among young adults". Journal of Behavioural Sciences. 26 (1): 66.
  68. ↑ Daly, Beth; Morton, L.L. (June 2006). "An investigation of human-animal interactions and empathy as related to pet preference, ownership, attachment, and attitudes in children". Anthrozoös. 19 (2): 113–127. doi:10.2752/089279306785593801. ISSN   0892-7936. S2CID   144545356.
  69. ↑ Poresky, Robert H. (June 1990). "The Young Children's Empathy Measure: Reliability, Validity and Effects of Companion Animal Bonding". Psychological Reports. 66 (3): 931–936. doi:10.2466/pr0.1990.66.3.931. ISSN   0033-2941. PMID   2377714. S2CID   18913034.
  70. ↑ Rothgerber, Hank; Mican, Frances (August 2014). "Childhood pet ownership, attachment to pets, and subsequent meat avoidance. The mediating role of empathy toward animals". Appetite. 79: 11–17. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2014.03.032. ISSN   0195-6663. PMID   24704704. S2CID   16737933.
  71. ↑ Daly, Beth; Suggs, Suzanne (2010-02-12). "Teachers' experiences with humane education and animals in the elementary classroom: implications for empathy development". Journal of Moral Education. 39 (1): 101–112. doi:10.1080/03057240903528733. ISSN   0305-7240. S2CID   145558039.
  72. ↑ Faver, Catherine A. (March 2010). "School-based humane education as a strategy to prevent violence: Review and recommendations". Children and Youth Services Review. 32 (3): 365–370. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.10.006. ISSN   0190-7409.
  73. ↑ Komorosky, Dawna; O’Neal, Keri K. (2015-10-02). "The development of empathy and prosocial behavior through humane education, restorative justice, and animal-assisted programs". Contemporary Justice Review. 18 (4): 395–406. doi:10.1080/10282580.2015.1093684. ISSN   1028-2580. S2CID   146610403.
  74. ↑ Joy, Melanie (2003). Psychic numbing and meat consumption: The psychology of carnism. Saybrook University.
  75. ↑ Joy, Melanie (2020). Why we love dogs, eat pigs, and wear cows: An introduction to carnism. Red Wheel.
  76. ↑ Piazza, Jared; Ruby, Matthew B.; Loughnan, Steve; Luong, Mischel; Kulik, Juliana; Watkins, Hanne M.; Seigerman, Mirra (August 2015). "Rationalizing meat consumption. The 4Ns". Appetite. 91: 114–128. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2015.04.011. ISSN   0195-6663. PMID   25865663. S2CID   11686309.
  77. ↑ Loughnan, Steve; Bastian, Brock; Haslam, Nick (April 2014). "The Psychology of Eating Animals". Current Directions in Psychological Science. 23 (2): 104–108. doi:10.1177/0963721414525781. ISSN   0963-7214. S2CID   145339463.
  78. ↑ Earle, Megan; Hodson, Gordon; Dhont, Kristof; MacInnis, Cara (2019-06-24). "Eating with our eyes (closed): Effects of visually associating animals with meat on antivegan/vegetarian attitudes and meat consumption willingness". Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. 22 (6): 818–835. doi:10.1177/1368430219861848. ISSN   1368-4302. S2CID   164266896.
  79. ↑ Mathur, Maya B; Peacock, Jacob; Reichling, David; Nadler, Janice; Bain, Paul; Gardner, Christopher D; Robinson, Thomas (2021-04-21). "Interventions to reduce meat consumption by appealing to animal welfare: Meta-analysis and evidence-based recommendations". Appetite. 164. doi:10.31219/osf.io/bc2wy. PMC   9205607 . PMID   33984401 . Retrieved 2023-12-10.
  80. ↑ Ly, Lexis H.; Weary, Daniel M. (2021-03-01). "Facial expression in humans as a measure of empathy towards farm animals in pain". PLOS ONE. 16 (3): e0247808. Bibcode:2021PLoSO..1647808L. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247808 . ISSN   1932-6203. PMC   7920373 . PMID   33647043.
  81. ↑ Kielland, C.; Skjerve, E.; Østerås, O.; Zanella, A.J. (July 2010). "Dairy farmer attitudes and empathy toward animals are associated with animal welfare indicators". Journal of Dairy Science. 93 (7): 2998–3006. doi: 10.3168/jds.2009-2899 . ISSN   0022-0302. PMID   20630216.
  82. ↑ "Top 11 Animal Charities to Donate to in 2023". Animal Charity Evaluators. Retrieved 2023-11-30.
  83. ↑ Walsh, Owen (2023). "What do animal organizations do, and why should I support them?". thehumaneleague.org. Retrieved 2023-11-30.
  84. ↑ "World Wildlife Crime Report 2016". World Wildlife Crime Report. 2016-06-30. doi:10.18356/e70581eb-en. ISBN   9789210580557. ISSN   2521-6155.
  85. ↑ Kansky, Ruth; Maassarani, Tarek (January 2022). "Teaching nonviolent communication to increase empathy between people and toward wildlife to promote human–wildlife coexistence". Conservation Letters. 15 (1). Bibcode:2022ConL...15E2862K. doi: 10.1111/conl.12862 . ISSN   1755-263X.
  86. ↑ Young, Ashley; Khalil, Kathayoon A.; Wharton, Jim (April 2018). "Empathy for Animals: A Review of the Existing Literature". Curator: The Museum Journal. 61 (2): 327–343. doi:10.1111/cura.12257. ISSN   0011-3069.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.