Researchers from the Universities of Exeter and Oxford asked a group of British children aged 9 to 11, young adults aged 18 to 21 and older men and women about their attitudes towards different species of animals. In general, the children said that farm animals and human beings should be treated the same and considered to eat animals that are less morally acceptable than the two sets of adults. The findings suggest that “specialization” – a moral hierarchy that gives different values to different animals – is learned during adolescence, according to the study. “The relationship between humans and animals is full of dual moral standards,” said lead author Luke McGuire, a lecturer at the University of Exeter who specializes in social and moral development. “Some animals are beloved companions of the household, while others are kept on factory farms for financial gain. “Crises seem to depend to a large extent on the species in question: dogs are our friends, pigs are food.” The report states that an important aspect of the human mind is the “moral acrobatics”: people can have conflicting moral values and use morally double standards. But the origins of animal-related acrobatics are poorly understood, and researchers say this new study provides some of the first evidence that examines differences in the way children and adults think about treating animals. Among other things, study participants were presented with images that included a farm animal and pets and were asked to categorize them as “food”, “pet” or “object”. They were asked how the animals behaved and how they should be treated. The children did not judge all the animals as equal. They concluded, in fact, that dogs should be treated better than pigs – but also that pigs should not be treated differently from humans. Both groups of adults said pigs should be treated less well than dogs, while humans and dogs should be treated the same. McGuire said the study suggests that while children believe that farm animals and humans should be treated equally well, from adulthood people believe that pets and humans should be treated better. He said children rated animal consumption as significantly less permissible than young adults and adults. “Something seems to be happening in adolescence, where this early love of animals becomes more complex and we develop more pessimism,” McGuire said. “It is important to note that even the adults in our study believed that eating meat was less morally acceptable than eating animal products such as milk. That way, the disgust for animals – including farm animals – to get hurt does not go away completely. “ McGuire said that while adjusting attitudes was a natural part of adulthood, “children’s moral intelligence” could be valuable. He said: “If we want people to switch to more plant-based diets for environmental reasons, we have to disrupt the current system somewhere. “For example, if children ate more plant-based foods in schools, this may be more in line with their moral values and may reduce normalization to the adult values we identify in this study.” The paper, published in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, is entitled “The Development of Spasm: Age-Related Differences in Animal Ethics.”
