叙事对动物福利态度和代表动物的亲社会行为的影响:三个预先注册的实验

IF 2 2区 社会学 0 LITERATURE
Aino Petterson , Gregory Currie , Stacie Friend , Heather J Ferguson
{"title":"叙事对动物福利态度和代表动物的亲社会行为的影响:三个预先注册的实验","authors":"Aino Petterson ,&nbsp;Gregory Currie ,&nbsp;Stacie Friend ,&nbsp;Heather J Ferguson","doi":"10.1016/j.poetic.2022.101709","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We report three randomised and pre-registered experiments examining the effects of narrative fiction (<em>vs.</em> narrative non-fiction <em>vs.</em> expository non-fiction) on concern for animal welfare. In Experiment 1a (<em>N</em> = 363) there was no significant increase in concern for animal welfare or willingness to donate to an animal charity among participants who read a narrative fiction text about a monkey's plight (<em>vs.</em> narrative non-fiction or expository non-fiction texts about a monkey). In Experiment 1b (<em>N =</em>121) concern for animal welfare and willingness to donate was greater after reading the narrative fiction text compared to a narrative non-fiction text unrelated to animals. Experiment 2 (<em>N =</em>184) employed a simplified design and more severe depiction of animal abuse, but showed no beneficial effect of reading a narrative fiction text about a monkey's plight (<em>vs.</em> a narrative non-fiction text unrelated to animals) on either measure. Experiment 3 (<em>N =</em>290) compared a narrative fiction and a non-fiction text about a monkey or a lizard; participants who read a narrative fiction text, irrespective of the animal depicted, reported greater concern for animal welfare, monkey welfare, lizard welfare and nature (<em>vs.</em> a narrative non-fiction text). However, participants were no more willing to donate in the narrative fiction (<em>vs.</em> non-fiction) condition. These results suggest that reading a narrative fiction text about an animal's plight has a limited effect on concern for animal welfare.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47900,"journal":{"name":"Poetics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304422X22000845/pdfft?md5=8f396acd964af8cb8df12b5be32db4cd&pid=1-s2.0-S0304422X22000845-main.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effect of narratives on attitudes toward animal welfare and pro-social behaviour on behalf of animals: Three pre-registered experiments\",\"authors\":\"Aino Petterson ,&nbsp;Gregory Currie ,&nbsp;Stacie Friend ,&nbsp;Heather J Ferguson\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.poetic.2022.101709\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>We report three randomised and pre-registered experiments examining the effects of narrative fiction (<em>vs.</em> narrative non-fiction <em>vs.</em> expository non-fiction) on concern for animal welfare. In Experiment 1a (<em>N</em> = 363) there was no significant increase in concern for animal welfare or willingness to donate to an animal charity among participants who read a narrative fiction text about a monkey's plight (<em>vs.</em> narrative non-fiction or expository non-fiction texts about a monkey). In Experiment 1b (<em>N =</em>121) concern for animal welfare and willingness to donate was greater after reading the narrative fiction text compared to a narrative non-fiction text unrelated to animals. Experiment 2 (<em>N =</em>184) employed a simplified design and more severe depiction of animal abuse, but showed no beneficial effect of reading a narrative fiction text about a monkey's plight (<em>vs.</em> a narrative non-fiction text unrelated to animals) on either measure. Experiment 3 (<em>N =</em>290) compared a narrative fiction and a non-fiction text about a monkey or a lizard; participants who read a narrative fiction text, irrespective of the animal depicted, reported greater concern for animal welfare, monkey welfare, lizard welfare and nature (<em>vs.</em> a narrative non-fiction text). However, participants were no more willing to donate in the narrative fiction (<em>vs.</em> non-fiction) condition. These results suggest that reading a narrative fiction text about an animal's plight has a limited effect on concern for animal welfare.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47900,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Poetics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304422X22000845/pdfft?md5=8f396acd964af8cb8df12b5be32db4cd&pid=1-s2.0-S0304422X22000845-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Poetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304422X22000845\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Poetics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304422X22000845","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

我们报告了三个随机和预注册的实验,研究叙事性小说(相对于叙事性非小说和说明性非小说)对动物福利关注的影响。在实验1a (N = 363)中,阅读关于猴子困境的叙事性小说文本(与关于猴子的叙事性非小说或说明文非小说文本相比)的参与者对动物福利的关注或向动物慈善机构捐款的意愿没有显著增加。在实验1b (N =121)中,与阅读与动物无关的叙事性非虚构文本相比,阅读叙事性虚构文本后,人们对动物福利的关注和捐赠意愿更大。实验2 (N =184)采用了简化的设计和更严厉的动物虐待描述,但在两项测量中都没有显示阅读关于猴子困境的叙事小说文本(与动物无关的叙事非小说文本相比)的有益效果。实验3 (N =290)比较了关于猴子或蜥蜴的叙事性小说和非虚构文本;阅读叙事性小说文本的参与者,无论描述的动物是什么,都更关心动物福利、猴子福利、蜥蜴福利和自然(与非虚构叙事文本相比)。然而,在叙事小说(与非小说)条件下,参与者并不更愿意捐赠。这些结果表明,阅读关于动物困境的叙事小说文本对关注动物福利的影响有限。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The effect of narratives on attitudes toward animal welfare and pro-social behaviour on behalf of animals: Three pre-registered experiments

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

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Poetics
Poetics Multiple-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
16.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Poetics is an interdisciplinary journal of theoretical and empirical research on culture, the media and the arts. Particularly welcome are papers that make an original contribution to the major disciplines - sociology, psychology, media and communication studies, and economics - within which promising lines of research on culture, media and the arts have been developed.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信