Keywords
ambivalent speciesism scale
animal rights
discrimination
animal ethics
How to Cite
Abstract
The aim of this study is to develop a scale compatible with current animal ethics studies to measure the phenomenon of speciesism, that is marginalization of animals and prejudice and discrimination against animals. In order to develop the Ambivalent Speciesism Scale, an item pool was created by examining the animal ethics literature and social psychology studies on human-animal relations, and then the items were edited by taking the opinions of people studying animal rights and experts in measurement and evaluation in psychology. The scale is designed in 7-point Likert type. The trial form was applied to the participants together with the Speciesism Scale, the Social Dominance Orientation Scale and the Basic Empathy Scale. Participants were selected from individuals representing different lifestyles in the context of animal use, using the snowball sampling technique. The study was conducted with 288 participants; 64 men, 217 women and, 7 of whom are not of both genders. While there were 24 items in the trial form of the scale, nine of these items were eliminated as a result of the factor analysis. The final form of the scale with 15 items has a high reliability (.90). The items of the scale are divided into three dimensions: belief in human superiority, protective speciesism, and speciesism in language. It was determined that the scores obtained from the scale were in positive correlation with the scores obtained from the other scale measuring speciesism and the social dominance orientation scale, as expected. The scores obtained from the scale are distributed as expected among the groups that include lifestyles related to animal use. These data were evaluated as findings showing the validity of the scale.
References
Ascione, F. R. (1993). Children who are cruel to animals: A review of research and implications for developmental psychopathology. Anthrozoös, 6 (4), 226-247. doi: 10.2752/089279393787002105
Bastian, B. ve Loughnan, S. (2017). Resolving the meat-paradox: A motivational account of morally troublesome behavior and its maintenance. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21(3), 278- 299. doi:10.1177/1088868316647562
Bekoff, M. (1998). Resisting speciesism and expanding the community of equals. BioScience, 48(8), 638- 641. doi:10.2307/1313423
Bentham, J. (1970). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789), ed. by J. H Burns and HLA Hart, London.
Burghardt, G.M. (1997) Review of Cavalieri and Singer, Society and Animals, 5, 83–86. doi: 10.1163/156853097X00231
Caviola, L., Everett, J. A. ve Faber, N. S. (2018). The moral standing of animals: Towards a psychology of speciesism. Journal of personality and social psychology. doi:10.1037/pspp0000182
Cook, G. (2015). ‘A pig is a person’or ‘You can love a fox and hunt it’: Innovation and tradition in the discursive representation of animals. Discourse & Society, 26(5), 587-607. doi: 10.1177/0957926515576639
Dhont, K., Hodson, G. ve Leite, A. C. (2016). Common ideological roots of speciesism and generalized ethnic prejudice: The social dominance human–animal relations model (SD-HARM). European Journal of Personality, 30(6), 507-522. doi:10.1002/per.2069
Everett, J. A., Caviola, L., Savulescu, J. ve Faber, N. S. (2019). Speciesism, generalized prejudice, and perceptions of prejudiced others. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 22(6), 785-803. doi:10.1177/1368430218816962
Fisher, R. J. (1993). Social desirability bias and the validity of indirect questioning. Journal of consumer research, 20(2), 303-315. doi:10.1086/209351
Francione, G. L. (2006). Taking sentence seriously. Journal of Animal Law & Ethics, 1, 1.
Francione, G. L. (2008). Hayvan haklarına giriş: çocuğunuz mu köpeğiniz mi?. çev , Gen, E., İletişim.
Francione, G. L. (2012). Animal welfare, happy meat, and veganism as the moral baseline. The philosophy of food, 169-189.
Francione, G. L. (2013). “Animal Welfare Regulation, “Happy Exploitation,” and Speciesism”, Animal Rights Abolitionist Approach (Web Sitesi) https://www.abolitionistapproach.com/animal-welfare-regulation-happy-exploitation-and-speciesism/ (Erişim tarihi: 10.04.2019)
Francione, G. L. ve Garner, R. (2010). The animal rights debate: Abolition or regulation?. Columbia University Press.
Francione, G. L. ve Charlton, A. (2015). Animal rights: The abolitionist approach. Exempla Press.
Glick, P. ve Fiske, S. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 491–512. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491
Hyers, L. L. (2006). Myths used to legitimize the exploitation of animals: An application of social dominance theory. Anthrozoös, 19(3), 194-210. doi:10.2752/089279306785415538
Jolliffe, D. ve Farrington, D. P. (2006). Development and validation of the Basic Empathy Scale. Journal of adolescence, 29(4), 589-611. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2005.08.010
Karaçanta, H. (2002). Üniversite öğrencilerinin sosyal baskınlık yönelimi ve başka bazı değişkenler açısından karşılaştırılması. (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Ankara Üniversitesi/Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
Piazza, J., Cooper, L. ve Slater-Johnson, S. (2019). Rationalizing the Many Uses of Animals: Application of the 4N Justifications Beyond Meat. Human-Animal Interaction Bulletin. 8(1), 1-22.
Piazza, J., Ruby, M. B., Loughnan, S., Luong, M., Kulik, J., Watkins, H. M. ve Seigerman, M. (2015). Rationalizing meat consumption. The 4Ns. Appetite, 91, 114-128. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2015.04.011
Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M. ve Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of personality and social psychology, 67(4), 741. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741
Ryder, R. D. (2004). Speciesism revisited. Think, 2(6), 83-92. doi: 10.1017/s1477175600002840
Singer, P. (2005). Hayvan Özgürleşmesi, çev. Hayrullah Doğan, Ayrıntı Yayınları, İstanbul.
Singer, P., Mason, J. ve Adamson, R. (2006). The way we eat: Why our food choices matter. Emmaus, PA: Rodale.
Topçu, Ç., Baker, Ö. E. ve Aydın, Y. Ç. (2010). Temel empati ölçeği Türkçe uyarlaması: geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Türk Psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Dergisi, 4(34).
Wanous, J. P., Reichers, A. E. ve Hudy, M. J. (1997). Overall job satisfaction: how good are single-item measures?. Journal of applied Psychology, 82(2), 247.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2020 Nesne Psikoloji Dergisi