Stepping Up, Stepping In: Factors Influencing the Reporting of Animal Cruelty
Incidents of animal cruelty are often hidden from public view. They may happen behind the closed doors of private homes, or in places where few people have access, such as farms and other places of animal use. However, sometimes incidents of cruelty occur where others might witness or otherwise be aware of them. Though many animal advocates would no doubt report an incident of cruelty, this is not always the case with the general public. This study from Australia delves into this issue, to look at how demographics are related to an individual’s willingness to report deliberate acts of animal cruelty. The authors note that, “although a small, but growing, amount of information is available concerning the variables that affect attitudes toward the treatment of animals, little empirical evidence exists on the variables that affect willingness to acknowledge and report animal cruelty.” In other words, despite starting to understand why some individuals are cruel to animals, we know very little about why people might not report cruelty.
Various factors are “known to affect individuals’ attitudes toward animals,” including: “gender; experience of companion animals both as a child and an adult; age, income, and educational level; marital status; ethical ideology; religious persuasion; and race and the respondent’s place of residence in a rural or urban environment.” The authors also note that some factors have been identified which encourage/discourage the reporting of non-animal-specific crime, such as: “type and seriousness of the crime; financial loss; presence or absence of witnesses; and distrust of law enforcement agencies and fear of community retaliation.” Still, they note that it is unlikely that the same factors would affect the willingness to report animal abuse or cruelty. To better understand the issue, the authors conducted telephone surveys with over 1,200 Australians, with an almost equal number of male and female respondents, asking them a series of demographic questions, as well as questions about animal cruelty and their willingness to report it.
“Of the variables previously shown to influence attitude toward animals, the following were also shown to affect propensity to report,” the authors note:
(a) gender
(b) employment status and occupation type by gender
(c) knowledge of to whom to report
(d) awareness of the link between family violence and deliberate animal harm.
In addition to this, the study found that “gender proved to have a significant effect on an individual’s propensity to report animal abuse,” which they say is “remarkably consistent” with other studies that look at the attitudes of different demographics towards animals. Perhaps most importantly, the study found that, when respondents were aware of the link between family violence and animal abuse, and knew how to report incidents of cruelty, their likelihood to report was considerably higher. The researchers point out that there are “several limitations” with the study, most notably “the potential for social desirability bias within the respondents’ replies.” In other words, it is possible that respondents may have been giving the types of answers they thought that the researchers were looking for.
The study’s concluding remarks note that since “knowledge of the link between family violence and animal abuse and knowledge of to whom to report acts of animal abuse” was such a crucial factor in the reporting of animal abuse, “any attempts to increase reporting of deliberate animal harm should be directed at increasing knowledge of such links and informing the public of appropriate responses to take if such acts are witnessed.” For animal advocates, a worthwhile advocacy project could be to encourage the public through various media to “see something / say something” as numerous other public safety campaigns do. This study is useful to remind us not to assume that the public would always report animal cruelty as we would.