East Carolina University
Department of
Psychology
The Animal Rights Scale: Measuring Attitudes About Animal Rights and Animal Research
Below are the 28 items which were used to measure attitudes towards animal experimentation and animal rights in the research which is presented in:
· Wuensch, K. L., Jenkins, K. W., & Poteat, G. M. (2002). Misanthropy, idealism, and attitudes towards animals. Anthrozoös, 15, 139-149
· Sharp, H. W., Wuensch, K. L., Eppler, M. A., & Harju, B. L. (2006, April). Narcissism, empathy, and attitudes towards animals. Presented at the Spring Conference of the North Carolina Psychological Association and North Carolina Psychological Foundation, Charlotte, NC.
An unrotated factor analysis on these 28 items indicated that there was only one good factor on which all items loaded well. Item-total correlations were good, with Cronbach’s alpha being .91. Estimated lambda4 (which is a better estimate of reliability than is Cronbach’s alpha) was .93. In other words, these 28 items were internally consistent, all measuring the same basic construct. High scores on this instrument indicate that the respondent is supportive of animal rights.
A rotated factor analysis did indicate that two subscale scores could be created:
Here are instructions for scoring this instrument:
· Numerically code the A,B,C,D,E response scale as 1,2,3,4,5. That is, the higher the number, the greater the agreement with the statement.
· Reflect (reverse score) items 16, 19, 21, 24, and 28, since agreeing with these items indicates that the respondent was not a supporter of animal rights. This is most easily accomplished by subtracting the item score from 6 (that way, a 1 becomes a 5, a 2 becomes a 4, ....., a 5 becomes a 1).
· If any respondents failed to answer some of the questions, then you have to consider how many unanswered questions it takes before you decide to discard that respondent from your study. With 28 items, I do not think it would be a problem keeping respondents who left 1 or 2 or even 3 items unanswered.
· To obtain an overall score, simply compute, for each respondent, the average (mean) of the 28 items. Maintain at least two decimal point precision in these computations.
· If you wish to compute subscale scores, here is how they break down:
· Use items 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20, 22, 23, 24, 26, & 28 for the Animal Use subscale
· Use items 2, 6, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 25, & 27 for the Animal Research subscale.
· Notice that five items (11, 12, 14, 15, and 20) are used on both subscales and one item (8) on neither.
Here are the questions with instructions and response scale:
This questionnaire was designed to measure your attitudes about a number of potentially related things. You will find a series of statements below. Each represents a commonly held opinion and there are no right or wrong answers. You will probably disagree with some items and agree with others. We are interested in the extent to which you agree or disagree with such matters of opinion. Please read each statement carefully and then indicate the extent of your disagreement/agreement with each item according to the following scale:
|
A |
B |
C |
D |
E |
|
strongly disagree |
disagree |
no opinion |
agree |
strongly agree |
Please indicate your response by filling in the appropriate circle (A, B, C, D, or E) on the multiple choice answer sheet. Please use a number 2 pencil. Mark only one response for each item. Please do not mark the questionnaire itself ‑ save a tree by returning the questionnaire unmarked so we can use it again. Do not put any identifying information (such as name or social security number) on your answer sheet ‑‑ we want your responses to be confidential.
01. Humans have no right to displace wild animals by converting wilderness areas into farmlands, cities, and other things designed for people.
02. Animal research cannot be justified and should be stopped.
03. It is morally wrong to drink milk and eat eggs.
04. A human has no right to use a horse as a means of transportation (riding) or entertainment (racing).
05. It is wrong to wear leather jackets and pants.
06. Most medical research done on animals is unnecessary and invalid.
07. I have seriously considered becoming a vegetarian in an effort to save animal lives.
08. Pet owners are responsible for preventing their pets from killing other animals, such as cats killing mice or snakes eating live mice.
09. We need more regulations governing the use of animals in research.
10. It is morally wrong to eat beef and other "red" meat.
11. Insect pests (mosquitoes, cockroaches, flies, etc.) should be safely removed from the house rather than killed.
12. Animals should be granted the same rights as humans.
13. It is wrong to wear leather belts and shoes.
14. I would rather see humans die or suffer from disease than to see animals used in research.
15. Having extended basic rights to minorities and women, it is now time to extend them also to animals.
16R. God put animals on Earth for man to use.
17. There are plenty of viable alternatives to the use of animals in biomedical and behavioral research.
18. Research on animals has little or no bearing on problems confronting people.
19R. New surgical procedures and experimental drugs should be tested on animals before they are used on people.
20. I am very concerned about pain and suffering in animals.
21R. Since many important questions cannot be answered by doing experiments on people, we are left with no alternatives but to do animal research.
22. It is a violation of an animal's rights to be held captive as a pet by a human.
23. It is wrong to wear animal fur (such as mink coats).
24R. It is appropriate for humans to kill animals that destroy human property, for example, rats, mice, and pigeons.
25. Most cosmetics research done on animals is unnecessary and invalid.
26. It is morally wrong to eat chicken and fish.
27. Most psychological research done on animals is unnecessary and invalid.
28R. Hunters play an important role in regulating the size of deer populations.
Here are the loadings for a two factor solution, varimax rotation, using the data from Wuensch, Jenkins, and Poteat.
Rotated Factor Pattern
Item Factor1 Factor2
1 0.34368 0.25990
3 0.34143 0.12387
4 0.55011 0.21016
5 0.65045 0.37097
7 0.62670 0.22358
10 0.70601 0.16278
13 0.62083 0.47919
16 0.37470 0.23070
22 0.37717 0.24930
23 0.46499 0.35149
24 0.57211 0.03319
26 0.53704 0.31006
28 0.39105 0.01433
11 0.34321 0.38338
12 0.44435 0.51961
14 0.33862 0.28969 see additional factor analysis below
15 0.48379 0.48831
20 0.31699 0.46114
2 0.29957 0.67955
6 0.17256 0.79259
9 0.22172 0.48812
17 0.09130 0.59335
18 0.03821 0.41995
19 0.34364 0.43313 see additional factor analysis below
21 0.24825 0.34682
25 0.33691 0.38224 see additional factor analysis below
27 0.11897 0.66507
8 0.17658 0.31561
Chronbach's alpha was .889 for the Animal Use Scale and .870 for the Animal Research scale.
Here are the loadings for a two factor solution, varimax rotation, using the data from Sharp et al.
Rotated Factor Matrix(a)
|
Item |
Factor |
|
|
|
1 |
2 |
|
1 |
.337 |
.327 |
|
3 |
.497 |
.103 |
|
4 |
.506 |
.225 |
|
5 |
.692 |
.069 |
|
7 |
.624 |
.319 |
|
10 |
.743 |
.231 |
|
13 |
.764 |
.098 |
|
16 |
.276 |
.187 |
|
22 |
.321 |
-.001 |
|
23 |
.608 |
.117 |
|
24 |
.338 |
.083 |
|
26 |
.669 |
.305 |
|
28 |
.330 |
.158 |
|
11 |
.391 |
.268 |
|
12 |
.401 |
.387 |
|
14 |
.287 |
.378 |
|
15 |
.415 |
.495 |
|
20 |
.365 |
.313 |
|
2 |
.171 |
.644 |
|
6 |
.243 |
.692 |
|
9 |
.334 |
.496 |
|
17 |
.032 |
.479 |
|
18 |
.004 |
.358 |
|
19 |
.116 |
.550 |
|
21 |
.109 |
.556 |
|
25 |
.295 |
.465 |
|
27 |
.180 |
.522 |
|
8 |
.274 |
.170 |
Extraction Method: Principal Axis Factoring.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
Cronbach's alpha was .864 for the Animal Use subscale and .846 for the Animal Research subscale.