CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 99

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Attitude to Animals and Empathy: Comparing Animal Protection and General Community Samples

Signal, Tania D., Taylor, Nicola·2007·Anthrozoös
DOI 10.2752/175303707x207918
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Although a number of studies have examined a range of demographic and personality variables that may impact upon attitudes towards the treatment of non-human species, little consensus has been reached within the literature. The aim of the current study was to evaluate and assess levels of human-directed empathy and attitudes towards the treatment of animals in two diverse populations, namely the general community (n = 543) and those within the animal protection field (n = 389). Both groups of participants completed the Attitude Towards the Treatment of Animals Scale (AAS) and the Davis Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), a measure of human-directed empathy. Comparisons between the two samples indicated that those within the animal protection community scored more highly on both the animal attitude and human-directed empathy measures. Correlational analyses revealed a positive relation between AAS and IRI scores for both samples, whilst the strength of the correlation was greater for those within the animal protection sample. These findings are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2752/175303707x207918

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 24

  1. 10.1023/A:1025936213110 · DOI
  2. Ascione F.R. and Arkow P. eds. 1999. Child Abuse Domestic Violence and Animal Abuse: Linking the Circles of Compassion for Prevention and Intervention. West Lafayette IN: Purdue University Press.
  3. 10.2752/089279390787057784 · DOI
  4. 10.1163/156853093X00037 · DOI
  5. 10.1027//1015-5759.17.1.36 · DOI
  6. 10.2752/089279303786992026 · DOI
  7. Davis, M.H. 1980. A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalogue of Selected Documents in Psychology 10: 85.
  8. Eisenberg, N. and Strayer, J. 1987. Critical issues in the study of empathy. Empathy and its Development, 3–13, ed. N. Eisenberg and J. Strayer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  9. 10.2752/089279303786992260 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1207/s15327019eb0203_1 · DOI
  11. 10.1037/0012-1649.36.5.531 · DOI
  12. 10.2752/089279391787057170 · DOI
  13. Kellert, S.R. 1988. Human-animal interactions: A review of American attitudes toward wild and domestic animals in the 20th century. Animals and People Sharing the World, 137–175, ed. A.N. Rowan. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.
  14. Kimball, R. 1989. Liberal/Conservative voting records compared to interest in animal protection bills. PsyETA Bulletin 9: 7–9.
  15. Mathews, S. and Herzog, H. 1997. Personality and attitudes towards the treatment of animals. Society & Animals 5(2): 57–63.
  16. 10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.324 · DOI
  17. 10.2752/089279300786999699 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1017/S0962728600016109 · DOI
  19. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1991.tb00131.x · DOI
  20. 10.1163/156853006776778743 · DOI
  21. 10.1163/156853006778149181 · DOI
  22. Taylor, N. and Signal, T. 2004. Attitudes to animals: An indicator of interpersonal violence? Journal of the Home Economics Institute of Australia 11(3): 9–12.
  23. 10.2752/089279305785594342 · DOI
  24. 10.1023/A:1023575212526 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 99

Metadata

Authors
Signal, T. D., & Taylor, N.
Affiliations
School of Psychology & Sociology, Central Queensland University, Australia
Venue
Anthrozoös
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2007-06
Volume
20
Issue
2
Pages
125-130
ISSN
  • 0892-7936
  • 1753-0377
DOI
10.2752/175303707x207918
Cited by
99
References
1
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Attitude to Animals and Empathy: Comparing Animal Protection and General Community Samples. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2752/175303707x207918
The paper
Signal, T. D., & Taylor, N. (2007). Attitude to Animals and Empathy: Comparing Animal Protection and General Community Samples. Anthrozoös. https://doi.org/10.2752/175303707x207918