Cited by 3

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Some we love, some we hate, some we eat: why it's so hard to think straight about animals

·2011·Choice Reviews Online

Abstract

Does living with a pet really make people happier and healthier? What can we learn from biomedical research with mice? Who enjoys a better quality of life - the chicken on a dinner plate or a rooster who dies in a Saturday night cockfight? Why is it wrong to eat the family dog? Drawing on over two decades of research in the emerging field of anthrozoology, the science of human-animal relations, Hal Herzog offers surprising answers to these and other questions related to the moral conundrums we face day in and day out regarding the creatures with whom we share our world. We Love, Some We Hate, Some We Eat is a highly entertaining and illuminating journey through the full spectrum of human-animal relations, based on Dr. Herzog's groundbreaking research on animal rights activists, cockfighters, professional dog show handlers, veterinary students, and biomedical researchers. Blending anthropology, history, brain science, behavioural economics, evolutionary psychology, and philosophy, Herzog carefully crafts a seamless narrative enriched with real life anecdotes, scientific research, and his own sense of moral ambivalence. Alternately poignant, challenging, and laugh-out-loud funny, his enlightening and provocative book will forever change the way we look at our relationships with other creatures and, ultimately, how we see ourselves.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5860/choice.48-4485

Cites

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 3

Metadata

Venue
Choice Reviews Online
Published
2011-04-01
Volume
48
Issue
08
Pages
48-4485-48-4485
ISSN
  • 0009-4978
  • 1523-8253
Cited by
0
References
0
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: Some we love, some we hate, some we eat: why it's so hard to think straight about animals. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.48-4485
The paper
Some we love, some we hate, some we eat: why it's so hard to think straight about animals. (2011). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.48-4485