Conventional animal farms often lead to suffering for animals. Since animal-friendly farming can reduce the negative situation for livestock, this research aims to explore the mechanisms behind...Show moreConventional animal farms often lead to suffering for animals. Since animal-friendly farming can reduce the negative situation for livestock, this research aims to explore the mechanisms behind choosing animal-friendly products. Evidence suggests people have more empathy for animals which are evolutionarily closer to us, so we aimed to see how empathy and evolutionary proximity affect animal-friendly choices. We first hypothesized that people would have more empathy for cows (mammals) rather than chickens (birds) due to their evolutionary distance from humans. Secondly, we hypothesized that the difference in empathy between the two animals would predict whether participants made a cow-friendly or chicken-friendly choice. After being informed of the conditions on conventional and animal-friendly farms, participants (N= 42) were given a questionnaire to assess their empathy levels for both animals, as well as a choice to choose either a cow-friendly or chicken-friendly product. As hypothesized, people possessed more empathy for cows rather than chickens. However, alogistic regression analysis revealed that empathy did not significantly predict this choice. While empathy was not a significant predictor, more participants chose the cow-friendly rather than chicken-friendly product. The current results show that empathy alone may not be enough to explain the mechanism behind what motivates people to make choices that are positive for the animals which are evolutionarily closer to us. Therefore, directions for future research are discussed.Show less
Research master thesis | Psychology (research) (MSc)
closed access
In this study, we investigated how people’s contribution decisions in a public goods game change when uncertainty about the effects of the contribution is introduced. Additionally, we investigated...Show moreIn this study, we investigated how people’s contribution decisions in a public goods game change when uncertainty about the effects of the contribution is introduced. Additionally, we investigated whether social value orientation (SVO) and subjective wealth (SW) might have moderating effects on contribution behavior. Using a mixed model, we found that participants contributed significantly less in the uncertain condition when there was a chance that the contributions may be wasted compared to the certain condition. However, we did not find any moderating effects on contribution behavior for SVO and SW. When it was uncertain whether incurring a personal cost would benefit the collective, both pro-socials and pro-selves contributed less to a public good. Overall, participants seemed to choose the option with the highest expected utility and the least uncertainty.Show less
