Women have long been recognized for their ability to empathize with non-human animals, but this ability among men is less understood. Previous studies suggest that those with companion animals have a higher level of empathy and moral concern for other animals, especially as adults — referred to as the “pets as ambassadors” hypothesis. Therefore, for the present study, researchers wanted to see if the level of empathy in men would change based on whether or not they had companion animals.

The researchers distributed a survey via social media and their own networks to an all-male study population of Australian adults, mainly from Victoria, who self-identified as belonging to one of three “animal experience” groups: those who were companion animal guardians, those who worked in animal agriculture, and those with limited experience with animals.

The survey was based on the Animal Empathy Scale, a tool that measures empathetic attitudes towards animals using statements such as “It upsets me to see animals being chased and killed by lions in wildlife programs on TV” and “I get annoyed by dogs that howl and bark when they are left alone.” These statements are rated on a nine-point agreement scale, with possible scores ranging from a minimum of 22 to a maximum of 198. The survey also included demographic questions and a final open-ended question asking participants about the main influence on their belief regarding what animals think and feel.

A total of 91 men completed the study: 41 were in the companion animal group, with a majority having dogs (93%) and cats (51%); 22 were in the limited animal experience category; and 28 were in the animal agriculture category. In the latter category, most (93%) also had companion animals, mainly birds and fish, as well as dogs they saw as working animals.

In line with the researchers’ expectations, participants with companion animals had the highest empathy scores (an average of nearly 154). Farmers had intermediate empathy scores (an average of around 136) and those with limited animal experience had the lowest empathy scores (an average of roughly 127).

All groups believed that various direct interactions with animals in adulthood had the most impact on their beliefs about the inner lives of animals. Not surprisingly, most of the companion animal group pointed to their personal experiences with pets (55%), while the majority of the animal agriculture group highlighted their experiences with animals through work (60%). The limited experience group tended to note their experiences with other people’s pets (48%).

Childhood experiences with animals were important for 26% of companion animal guardians, 16% of farmers, and 19% of limited experience participants.

The influence of scientific knowledge about animals or the media was less common overall, though both of these were more likely to be cited by those with limited animal experience (24% and 14%, respectively).

The researchers suggest that the link between having companion animals and higher empathy might be explained because of the personal responsibility involved in caring for pets. This responsibility increases from childhood to adulthood, possibly resulting in a different — and deeper — human-animal bond in later life that influences perspectives on other species.

Another key takeaway is highlighted by the farmers who also had companion animals, as they seemed to view animals through the lens of their livelihoods. The researchers suggest that cognitive dissonance might be involved. Given that these men know that many of the animals they work with will be harmed as part of their work, they may be mentally distancing themselves from the suffering and perhaps this impacts their relationships with all animals — even their own pets.

However, the researchers note a limitation to their findings: the study only established a correlation between having companion animals and higher levels of empathy, not a causal link. As such, while the results suggest that having companion animals leads to greater empathy towards other species, they could also mean that people with more empathy are also more likely to have companion animals. A longitudinal study would resolve this by exploring how empathy develops within specific individuals and based on particular experiences with animals.

Given the strong links between violence towards animals and violence towards people found in previous research, it’s important to understand the development of empathy in men as it has implications for both animal and human welfare. For animal advocates, this study clearly demonstrates the importance of exposing men to direct interactions with animals to impact their perceptions of them, rather than just relying on the media or dissemination of scientific knowledge. In particular, it underscores the need to factor in the potential cognitive dissonance that may develop instead, especially for those who rely on animals for work.