Rationalizing the Many Uses of Animals: Application of the 4N Justifications Beyond Meat

Jared Piazza, L. Cooper, Shannon Slater-Johnson
{"title":"Rationalizing the Many Uses of Animals: Application of the 4N Justifications Beyond Meat","authors":"Jared Piazza, L. Cooper, Shannon Slater-Johnson","doi":"10.1079/hai.2020.0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Past research has uncovered four common justifications for using animals as food — the 4Ns — that eating meat is\n Natural, Normal, Necessary,\n and\n Nice.\n The current research investigated the extent to which the 4Ns might apply more generally to other animal uses. Two studies examined the moral justifications people spontaneously offered for various animal uses, including household products, clothing, culling, and horse racing (Study1), and in zoos, TV/film, as pets, and for medical testing (Study 2). Participants offered reasons for why it is okay to use animals and the responses were coded by independent raters. The 4N categories accounted for the majority of justifications across most uses. There was great variability in justification categories offered for each use, and some uses generated justification categories not covered within the 4N scheme, including humane treatment, prioritization of human lives, and sustainability arguments. This research provides a large-scope investigation of animal use justifications that moves beyond meat consumption.\n","PeriodicalId":90845,"journal":{"name":"Human-animal interaction bulletin","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human-animal interaction bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1079/hai.2020.0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Past research has uncovered four common justifications for using animals as food — the 4Ns — that eating meat is Natural, Normal, Necessary, and Nice. The current research investigated the extent to which the 4Ns might apply more generally to other animal uses. Two studies examined the moral justifications people spontaneously offered for various animal uses, including household products, clothing, culling, and horse racing (Study1), and in zoos, TV/film, as pets, and for medical testing (Study 2). Participants offered reasons for why it is okay to use animals and the responses were coded by independent raters. The 4N categories accounted for the majority of justifications across most uses. There was great variability in justification categories offered for each use, and some uses generated justification categories not covered within the 4N scheme, including humane treatment, prioritization of human lives, and sustainability arguments. This research provides a large-scope investigation of animal use justifications that moves beyond meat consumption.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
合理化动物的多种用途:在肉类之外的4N理由的应用
过去的研究揭示了使用动物作为食物的四个常见理由——4n——吃肉是自然的、正常的、必要的和好的。目前的研究调查了4Ns在多大程度上可能更广泛地应用于其他动物用途。两项研究调查了人们自发地为各种动物用途提供的道德理由,包括家用产品、服装、扑杀和赛马(研究1),以及动物园、电视/电影、宠物和医学测试(研究2)。参与者提供了为什么可以使用动物的理由,这些回答由独立评分者编码。在大多数使用中,这4N个类别占了大多数理由。为每种用途提供的理由类别存在很大差异,有些用途产生的理由类别未包括在4N方案中,包括人道待遇、人类生命的优先次序和可持续性论点。这项研究提供了一个大范围的调查动物使用的理由,超越了肉类消费。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Perception and Effect of Aggressive Dog Breeds on Human Social Interactions Impacts of Dog Ownership and Attachment on Total and Dog-related Physical Activity in Germany Comparing the Effect of Human-Dog Interactions and Progressive Muscle Relaxation on Self-Report and Physiological Measures of Stress Animal Welfare Considerations in Animal-Assisted Interventions The Loss of a Service Dog Through Retirement: Experiences and Impact on Human Partners
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1