Recent psychological research finds that U.S. American children have a weaker tendency than U.S. American adults to value humans more than animals. We aimed to conceptually replicate and extend this finding in a preregistered study (N = 412). We investigated whether 6- to 9-year-old Polish children (Study 1a) are less likely to prioritize humans over animals than Polish adults are (Studies 1b and 1c). We presented participants with moral dilemmas where they had to prioritize either humans or animals (dogs or chimpanzees) in situations that involved harming (i.e., a trolley problem) or benefiting (i.e., giving a snack). We found that Polish children prioritized humans over animals less than Polish adults did. This was the case both in dilemmas that involved preventing harm and in dilemmas that involved providing snacks. Both children and adults prioritized humans over chimpanzees more than humans over dogs.
AboudF. E. (2008). A social-cognitive developmental theory of prejudice. In QuintanaS. M.McKownC. (Eds.), Handbook of race, racism, and the developing child (pp. 55–71). John Wiley & Sons.
2.
AlvesR. R. N.BarbozaR. R. D. (2018). Chapter 15: The role of animals in human culture. In Nóbrega AlvesR. R.AlbuquerqueU. P. (Eds.), Ethnozoology (pp. 277–301). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809913-1.00015-6
3.
AmiotC. E.BastianB. (2015). Toward a psychology of human–animal relations. Psychological Bulletin, 141, 6–47. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038147
4.
AwadE.DsouzaS.KimR.SchulzJ.HenrichJ.ShariffA.BonnefonJ.-F.RahwanI. (2018). The moral machine experiment. Nature, 563, 59–64. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0637-6
5.
BostynD. H.SevenhantS.RoetsA. (2018). Of mice, men, and trolleys: Hypothetical judgment versus real-life behavior in trolley-style moral dilemmas. Psychological Science, 29, 1084–1093. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617752640
6.
BożewiczM. (2020, June). Religijność Polaków w ostatnich 20 latach [Religiosity of Poles in the last 20 years]. Public Opinion Research Center (CBOS), 63. https://www.cbos.pl/SPISKOM.POL/2020/K_063_20.PDF
7.
BürknerP.-C. (2017). Brms: An R package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. Journal of Statistical Software, 80, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v080.i01
8.
CaviolaL.EverettJ. A. C.FaberN. S. (2019). The moral standing of animals: Towards a psychology of speciesism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116, 1011–1029. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000182
9.
CaviolaL.KahaneG.EverettJ. A. C.TepermanE.SavulescuJ.FaberN. S. (2021). Utilitarianism for animals, Kantianism for people? Harming animals and humans for the greater good. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 150, 1008–1039. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000988
ColladoS.Rodríguez-ReyR.SorrelM. A. (2022). Does beauty matter? The effect of perceived attractiveness on children’s moral judgments of harmful actions against animals. Environment and Behavior, 54, 247–275. https://doi.org/10.1177/00139165211014626
12.
CooperJ. J.AshtonC.BishopS.WestR.MillsD. S.YoungR. J. (2003). Clever hounds: Social cognition in the domestic dog (Canis familiaris). Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 81, 229–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00284-8
13.
DhontK.HodsonG.LeiteA. 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, 507–522. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2069
14.
DhontK.HodsonG.LeiteA. C.SalmenA. (2019). The psychology of speciesism. In DhontK.HodsonG.(Eds.), Why we love and exploit animals (pp. 29–49). Routledge.
15.
DhontK.HodsonG.LoughnanS.AmiotC. E. (2019). Rethinking human-animal relations: The critical role of social psychology. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 22, 769–784. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430219864455
16.
FootP. (1967). The problem of abortion and the doctrine of the double effect. Oxford Review, 5, 5–15.
Henseler KozachenkoH.PiazzaJ. (2021). How children and adults value different animal lives. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 210, Article 105204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2021.105204
21.
HofstedeG. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. SAGE.
HussarK. M.HarrisP. L. (2018). Vegetarian and nonvegetarian children’s judgments of harm to animals and humans. Ecopsychology, 10, 36–43. https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2017.0039
25.
InglehartR.BakerW. E. (2000). Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values. American Sociological Review, 65, 19–51. https://doi.org/10.2307/2657288
KassR. E.RafteryA. E. (1995). Bayes factors. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 773–795. https://doi.org/10.2307/2291091
29.
KillenM.MulveyK. L.RichardsonC.JampolN.WoodwardA. (2011). The accidental transgressor: Morally-relevant theory of mind. Cognition, 119, 197–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2011.01.006
30.
LahamS. M. (2009). Expanding the moral circle: Inclusion and exclusion mindsets and the circle of moral regard. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 250–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2008.08.012
31.
LyA.EtzA.MarsmanM.WagenmakersE.-J. (2019). Replication Bayes factors from evidence updating. Behavior Research Methods, 51, 2498–2508. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1092-x
32.
MałeckiW.SorokowskiP.PawłowskiB.CieńskiM. (2020). Human minds and animal stories: How narratives make us care about other species. Routledge.
33.
MarshallJ.GollwitzerA.Mermin-BunnellK.ShinomiyaM.RetelsdorfJ.BloomP. (2022). How development and culture shape intuitions about prosocial obligations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 151, 1866–1882. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001136
34.
McGuireL.FryE.PalmerS. B.FaberN. S. (2022). Age-related differences in reasoning about the acceptability of eating animals. Social Development, 32, 690–703. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12655
35.
McGuireL.PalmerS. B.FaberN. S. (2023). The development of speciesism: Age-related differences in the moral view of animals. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 14, 228–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506221086182
MisiakM.ButovskayaM.SorokowskiP. (2018). Ecology shapes moral judgments towards food-wasting behavior: Evidence from the Yali of West Papua, the Ngorongoro Maasai, and Poles. Appetite, 125, 124–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.12.031
38.
MuthukrishnaM.BellA. V.HenrichJ.CurtinC. M.GedranovichA.McInerneyJ.ThueB. (2020). Beyond Western, Educated, Industrial, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) psychology: Measuring and mapping scales of cultural and psychological distance. Psychological Science, 31, 678–701. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620916782
39.
NeldnerK.CrimstonC.WilksM.RedshawJ.NielsenM. (2018). The developmental origins of moral concern: An examination of moral boundary decision making throughout childhood. PLOS ONE, 13, Article e0197819. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197819
40.
NeldnerK.WilksM. (2022). How do children value animals? A developmental review. Psychology of Human-Animal Intergroup Relations, 1, Article e9907. https://doi.org/10.5964/phair.9907
41.
NeldnerK.WilksM.CrimstonC. R.JaymesR. W. M.NielsenM. (2023). I mayNot like you, but I still care: Children differentiate moral concern from other constructs. Developmental Psychology, 59, 549–566. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001485
42.
NielsenM.HaunD. (2016). Why developmental psychology is incomplete without comparative and cross-cultural perspectives. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 371, Article 20150071. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0071
43.
NielsenM.HaunD.KärtnerJ.LegareC. H. (2017). The persistent sampling bias in developmental psychology: A call to action. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 162, 31–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.04.017
44.
PiazzaJ.LandyJ. F.GoodwinG. P. (2014). Cruel nature: Harmfulness as an important, overlooked dimension in judgments of moral standing. Cognition, 131, 108–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.12.013
45.
PiazzaJ.SimpsonV.McGuireL. (2023). Why children moralise harm to animals but not meat. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 27, 685–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2023.05.004
46.
ProkopZ. M.ZvaríkM.FedorP. (2021). The effect of animal bipedal posture on perceived cuteness, fear and willingness to protect them. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 9, Article 681241.
47.
ReineckeM. G.WilksM.BloomP. (2021). Developmental changes in perceived moral standing of robots. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 43. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8f32d068
48.
RustemovichA. R. (2017). Exploration of animals exploitation in food, clothes, entertainment and testing industries, its impact on economy and ecology. https://doi.org/10.20861/2410-2873-2017-32-003
49.
RutlandA.KillenM.AbramsD. (2010). A new social-cognitive developmental perspective on prejudice: The interplay between morality and group identity. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 279–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610369468
ScanesC. G.ChengzhongP. (2018). Chapter 11: Animals and religion, belief systems, symbolism and myth. In ScanesC. G.ToukhsatiS. R. (Eds.), Animals and human society (pp. 257–280). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-805247-1.00017-4
SorokowskiP.MarczakM.MisiakM.BiałekM. (2020). Trolley dilemma in Papua: Yali horticulturalists refuse to pull the lever. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 27, 398–403. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01700-y
55.
TurpinM. H.WalkerA. C.FugelsangJ. A.SorokowskiP.IgorG.BiałekM. (2021). The search for predictable moral partners: Predictability and moral (character) preferences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 97, Article 104196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104196
56.
UzI. (2015). The index of cultural tightness and looseness among 68 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46, 319–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022114563611
57.
VerhagenJ.WagenmakersE.-J. (2014). Bayesian tests to quantify the result of a replication attempt. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 1457–1475. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036731
58.
WilksM.CaviolaL.KahaneG.BloomP. (2021). Children prioritize humans over animals less than adults do. Psychological Science, 32, 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620960398
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
