ArticlePDF Available

Animal Consumption Associated with Higher Intimate Partner Aggression

Authors:

Abstract

Purpose This brief report examined associations between animal consumption and intimate partner aggression in a sample of undergraduates. Two possible explanatory variables for these associations, depressive symptoms and speciesism, were also examined. Methods Participants included 245 undergraduate students who provided electronic consent and completed a one-time anonymous survey. Results Results indicated that animal consumption was associated with higher use of physical and psychological intimate partner aggression, even after accounting for other correlates. Animal consumption was also associated with higher speciesism, and speciesism was associated with higher use of physical and psychological intimate partner aggression. Conclusions Results extend findings from prior studies documenting links between animal consumption and negative outcomes and further suggest that speciesism may play a role in understanding links between animal consumption and intimate partner aggression.
Vol.:(0123456789)
1 3
Journal of Family Violence (2024) 39:1539–1543
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-023-00556-0
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Animal Consumption Associated withHigher Intimate Partner
Aggression
CaseyT.Taft1,2,3 · EvelynG.Hamilton1,2· XeniaLeviyah1,2· KatherineE.Gnall4· CrystalL.Park4
Accepted: 12 April 2023 / Published online: 29 April 2023
This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply 2023
Abstract
Purpose This brief report examined associations between animal consumption and intimate partner aggression in a sample
of undergraduates. Two possible explanatory variables for these associations, depressive symptoms and speciesism, were
also examined.
Methods Participants included 245 undergraduate students who provided electronic consent and completed a one-time
anonymous survey.
Results Results indicated that animal consumption was associated with higher use of physical and psychological intimate
partner aggression, even after accounting for other correlates. Animal consumption was also associated with higher specie-
sism, and speciesism was associated with higher use of physical and psychological intimate partner aggression.
Conclusions Results extend findings from prior studies documenting links between animal consumption and negative out-
comes and further suggest that speciesism may play a role in understanding links between animal consumption and intimate
partner aggression.
Keywords Diet· Speciesism· Intimate partner aggression· Depression· Animal consumption
Considerable research suggests that diets high in animal
flesh may be associated with poorer physical health (Cross
etal., 2007; Larsson & Wolk, 2006; Vang etal., 2008). Other
evidence suggests the possibility that animal consumption
may be associated with mental health issues such as depres-
sion, perhaps due to metabolic stress, obesity, and inflam-
mation linked to its high fat content (Nucci etal., 2020;
Zhang etal., 2017). We are not aware of any published
research, however, on the association between animal con-
sumption and psychosocial outcomes such as aggression,
despite long interest in links between diet and antisociality
(Schauss, 1981; Schoenthaler & Bier, 1985). In the current
brief report, we examined the association between degree of
animal consumption and the use of aggression in intimate
relationships in an undergraduate sample. We also examined
the potential roles of depressive symptoms, which have been
linked with aggression in prior work (Johnson etal., 2020;
Nguyen & Parkhill, 2014), as well as speciesism (Singer,
1975), which refers to one’s sense of superiority over non-
human animals, to determine if these variables may help
explain any associations between animal consumption and
aggressive behavior.
It is possible that animal consumption may be associ-
ated with increased risk for aggressive behavior because of
its link with mental health issues. As mental health issues,
perhaps especially depressive symptoms, have consistently
been linked to aggression in prior work (Shorey etal., 2012;
Swogger etal., 2010), it is reasonable to expect that greater
consumption of animal flesh may be related to intimate part-
ner aggression partly as a function of its relationship with
poorer mental health more broadly.
Another potential explanation for a link between animal
consumption and aggressive behavior is speciesism. The
concept of speciesism was first introduced in the animal
advocacy literature by philosopher Peter Singer (1975) to
* Casey T. Taft
Casey.Taft@va.gov
1 Behavioral Science Division, National Center forPTSD, VA
Boston Healthcare System, 150 South Huntington, Boston,
MA02130, USA
2 VA Boston Healthcare System, Healthcare System (116 B-4),
Boston, MA, USA
3 Boston University School ofMedicine, Boston, MA, USA
4 University ofConnecticut, Storrs, CT, USA
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
1540 Journal of Family Violence (2024) 39:1539–1543
1 3
describe the belief that non-human animals have lower
inherent moral status due to their species membership.
More recently, this construct has been operationalized
and measured by researchers, with evidence supporting
the psychometric properties of a speciesism measure
(Caviola etal., 2019). This validation work indicates that
speciesism is associated with other prejudicial attitudes
including sexism, racism, and homophobia, suggesting
that these attitudes together reflect a view of others as
lesser, which can serve to justify mistreatment of these
“out” groups. Other evidence similarly suggests that spe-
ciesism is connected with views of social dominance such
that those higher in speciesism view lower status groups
less favorably (Jackson, 2019). Considering that specie-
sism may be associated with negative views of women and
power and control attitudes that are often found to underlie
abusive behavior (Juarros Basterretxea etal., 2019; Lynch
& Renzetti, 2020), animal consumption may be associated
with increased risk for intimate partner aggression in part
because it is associated with speciesism.
There are other possible unexamined reasons why
increased animal consumption may be associated with
greater use of aggression in relationships beyond mental
health issues and attitudes towards nonhuman animals.
For example, it is possible that more hypermasculine atti-
tudes may drive more animal consumption (Timeo & Suit-
ner, 2018) as well as relationship aggression (Schrock &
Padavic, 2007), and may help explain this association. It
has also been argued that children become habituated and
desensitized to violence growing up, and learning that it is
acceptable to kill and eat animals may represent an early
stage in that process (Joy, 2009). In its most extreme form,
those who directly harm nonhuman animals as children are
more likely to engage in severe violence as adults (Arluke
etal., 2018; Macdonald, 1963). Thus, it is possible that
greater consumption of animals reflects greater levels of
general desensitization to violence. From a more biologi-
cal perspective, stress hormones in animals flesh, such as
adrenaline, cortisol, and other steroids, which have been
shown to be elevated with increased fear experienced by
the animal during slaughter (Bozzo etal., 2018), may con-
tribute to aggressive behavior (Armstrong etal., 2021),
though we are not aware of prior work examining such
links with respect to animal consumption.
Our hypotheses were as follows: (a) Greater animal
consumption would be associated with higher depressive
symptoms, greater speciesism, and higher physical and
psychological intimate partner aggression at the bivari-
ate level; and (b) Animal consumption would be uniquely
associated with intimate partner aggression when control-
ling for the effects of depressive symptoms and speciesism
in multiple regression analyses.
Methods
Participants andProcedures
Participants included 245 undergraduate students (M
age = 19.26) recruited via the Psychology Department par-
ticipant pool at the University of Connecticut. The majority
of participants identified as White (n = 129, 52.7%), non-His-
panic/Latino (n = 186, 75.9%) and female (n = 139, 56.7%)
(see Table1). Participants provided electronic consent and
completed a one-time anonymous survey in exchange for
participation credit for an introductory psychology course.
The survey was made available to all undergraduate stu-
dents enrolled in a psychology course during the Spring of
2020. Students could choose which studies they wanted to
participate in by reading a written description of what the
study involved. The present study was described as follows:
“This study will ask you to participate in a one-time anony-
mous survey lasting about 30 minutes of individuals’ health
behaviors and beliefs.” This study did not actively recruit
individuals based on any pre-screening information; students
enrolled on a first come, first serve basis. All study proce-
dures were approved by the Institutional Review Board at the
University of Connecticut. One participant was excluded due
to taking the survey twice and providing inconsistent data.
Measures
Participants reported on degree of animal consumption using
an item assessing what percent of their diet included meat,
“____% of my meals include meat”.
Table 1 Demographic characteristics
Due to missing data (< 15% across variables), n’s range from 211 to
245. Participants were on average 19.26years old (SD =1.39)
Baseline characteristic n %
Gender
Female 139 56.7
Male 78 31.8
Other 1 0.40
Race
White/European American 129 52.7
Black/African American 16 6.50
Asian/Asian American 58 23.7
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 1 0.40
Native American/Alaskan Native 1 0.40
More than one race 6 2.40
Ethnicity
Hispanic/Latino 31 12.7
Not Hispanic/Latino 186 75.9
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
1541Journal of Family Violence (2024) 39:1539–1543
1 3
Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Depres-
sion, Anxiety, and Stress Scales, shortened 21-item version
(DASS-21; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995). Each item is rated
on a scale of 0 (Did not apply to me at all) to 3 (Applied
to me very much, or most of the time), and a total score
was computed by taking the sum of the seven items on the
depression subscale and multiplying by 2. The DASS-21 has
demonstrated strong psychometric properties including high
internal consistency, concurrent validity, factorial validity,
and reliability (Antony etal., 1998; Lovibond & Lovibond,
1995). Sample items are “I couldn’t seem to experience any
positive feeling at all” and “I felt down-hearted and blue”.
The internal consistency reliability estimate (Cronbach’s
alpha) for the depression subscale in this study was .80.
Speciesism was assessed using the 6-item Speciesism
Scale (Caviola etal., 2019). Each item was rated on a scale
of 1 (Strongly disagree) to 7 (Strongly agree) and a mean
score was computed. The Speciesism Scale has demon-
strated strong psychometric properties including good
internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and convergent
validity with other prejudicial attitude variables such as rac-
ism, sexism, and homophobia (Caviola etal., 2019). Sample
items are “Humans have the right to use animals however
they want to” and “It is morally acceptable to keep animals
in circuses for human entertainment”. The internal consist-
ency reliability estimate (Cronbach’s alpha) for this measure
in this study was .85.
Lifetime use of intimate partner aggression was assessed
using the Physical Assault and Psychological Aggression
subscales of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS-2;
Straus etal., 1996). Responses reflected estimated frequency
of behavior for each item, such that the mid-points of the
response categories for each item (e.g., 3–5 = 4) was used,
and these scores were summed for each subscale. The CTS2
has demonstrated excellent internal consistency reliability
and good construct and factorial validity (Newton etal.,
2001; Straus etal., 1996). Sample items are “I insulted or
swore at someone” and “I pushed or shoved someone”. The
internal consistency reliability estimate (Cronbach’s alpha)
for this measure was .80 for the Psychological Aggression
subscale and .92 for the Physical Assault subscale in the
present study.
Results
Bivariate Correlations
Table2 shows bivariate correlations among all primary
constructs of interest. As hypothesized, participants eat-
ing a diet with a higher degree of animal consumption
were more likely to report greater rates of both physical
and psychological intimate partner aggression use during
their lifetime (rs = .20 and .17, respectively). Additionally,
greater animal consumption was associated with greater
speciesism (r = .26). Participants with greater rates of spe-
ciesism were more likely to report use of both physical and
psychological intimate partner aggression (rs = .25 and
.15, respectively). Contrary to expectations, greater animal
consumption was not associated with higher depressive
symptoms. Higher depressive symptoms were associated
with higher use of psychological intimate partner aggres-
sion (r = .18), but not physical intimate partner aggres-
sion. Finally, physical and psychological intimate partner
aggression were highly intercorrelated (r = .69).
Multiple Regression Analyses
Separate multiple regression analyses examined associa-
tions between the correlates of interest and the two inti-
mate partner aggression outcomes (see Table3). Results
show that 7.4% of the variance in physical intimate part-
ner aggression and 6.3% of the variance in psychologi-
cal intimate partner aggression were accounted for by the
three predictors. Greater animal consumption (B = 0.02,
SE = 0.01, p < .05) and higher speciesism (B = 0.04,
SE =0.22, p < .05) were uniquely associated with greater
physical intimate partner aggression. Depressive symp-
toms did not have a significant unique association with
physical intimate partner aggression after accounting for
animal consumption and speciesism. Greater animal con-
sumption (B = 0.01, SE =0.01, p < .05) and higher rates
of depression (B = 0.07, SE = 0.03, p < .01) were uniquely
associated with greater psychological intimate partner
aggression, while speciesism did not have a significant
Table 2 Summary of
correlations
Due to missing data (< 1% across variables), n’s range from 223 to 224
* p < .01, ** p < .001
Variables Mean (SD) or % 1 2 3 4 5
1. Percentage of meals including meat 62.29 (24.35) –––
2. Depressive Symptoms 3.72 (5.60) 0.04
3. Speciesism 2.82 (1.07) 0.26** 0.00
4. Physical Aggression 3.24 (3.70) 0.20** 0.08 0.25**
5. Psychological Aggression 4.94 (2.23) 0.17* 0.18** 0.15* 0.69**
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
1542 Journal of Family Violence (2024) 39:1539–1543
1 3
unique association with intimate partner psychological
aggression.
Discussion
The present brief report aimed to examine the link between
animal consumption and use of intimate partner aggres-
sion. Results from this study were generally consistent with
hypotheses; greater consumption of animal flesh was associ-
ated with both physical and psychological intimate partner
aggression both at the bivariate level and when controlling
for other associated correlates including depressive symp-
toms and speciesism. Animal consumption was consistently
associated with use of intimate partner aggression and these
associations were not solely due to its relationship with other
assessed risk factors. These findings extend prior work that
suggests that higher animal consumption is associated with
negative physical and mental health outcomes (Cross etal.,
2007; Jacka etal., 2012; Larsson & Wolk, 2006; Vang etal.,
2008; Zhang etal., 2017) to other psychosocial behavioral
outcomes, namely use of physical and psychological inti-
mate partner aggression. Results suggest that eating nonhu-
man animals may not only be associated with greater risk for
negative physical and mental health issues, but also engag-
ing in harmful behaviors towards others including intimate
relationship partners.
The mechanisms explaining links between animal con-
sumption and intimate partner aggression require further
exploration in future studies given the unique associations
found in our analyses. Associations between animal con-
sumption and speciesism, and between speciesism and
aggression outcomes, suggest the possibility that those who
consume higher amounts of animal flesh may be more likely
to hold speciesist attitudes that may confer risk for intimate
partner aggression. Other researchers have found that higher
speciesism is associated with other oppressive attitudes such
as sexism, racism, and homophobia (Caviola etal., 2019),
and negative social dominance views (Jackson, 2019), and
thus it should not be surprising that speciesism may also be
associated with aggressive behavior in relationships.
The finding that animal consumption was not significantly
associated with depressive symptoms contrasts with some
prior work documenting this link, though inconsistent find-
ings on this association have been obtained across investi-
gations, which has been attributed to possible differences in
varieties of animal meat consumed and other eating habits
(Zhang etal., 2017). Results showing depressive symptoms
to be associated with intimate partner psychological aggres-
sion and not physical aggression was unexpected and should
be interpreted with caution and replicated in future work.
This study is not without its limitations. Future inves-
tigations are needed with larger, more diverse community
samples to attempt to replicate current findings and examine
other relevant social, attitudinal, biological, and nutritional
variables and models attempting to explain obtained asso-
ciations in this study. It would also be important to exam-
ine differences in findings for intimate partner aggression
outcomes and associated risk factors versus other forms
of aggression as this study only examined the former. It is
hoped that this study may represent an early stage in under-
standing how certain behaviors and attitudes regarding non-
human animals may relate to other attitudes and behaviors
towards other humans.
Declarations
Conflict of Interest We have no known conflict of interest to disclose.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attri-
bution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adapta-
tion, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long
as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source,
provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes
were made. The images or other third party material in this article are
included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated
otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in
the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not
permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will
need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a
copy of this licence, visit http:// creat iveco mmons. org/ licen ses/ by/4. 0/.
Table 3 Linear regression
analyses examining predictors
of aggression
Unstandardized estimates. n = 222. Significant effects are bolded
Psychological Aggression Physical Aggression
Variable B SE t p B SE t p
Percentage of meals including
meat
.013 .006 2.082 .038 .022 .010 2.282 .023
Depressive Symptoms .067 .026 2.617 .009 .043 .041 −1.059 .291
Speciesism .166 .140 1.182 .238 .581 .224 2.597 .010
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
1543Journal of Family Violence (2024) 39:1539–1543
1 3
References
Antony, M. M., Bieling, P. J., Cox, B. J., Enns, M. W., & Swinson, R.
P. (1998). Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item ver-
sions of the depression anxiety stress scales in clinical groups and
a community sample. Psychological Assessment, 10(2), 176–181.
Arluke, A., Lankford, A., & Madfis, E. (2018). Harming animals and
massacring humans: Characteristics of public mass and active
shooters who abused animals. Behavioral Sciences & the Law,
36(6), 739–751.
Armstrong, T., Wells, J., Boisvert, D. L., Lewis, R. H., Cooke, E. M.,
Woeckener, M., & Kavish, N. (2021). An exploratory analysis of
testosterone, cortisol, and aggressive behavior type in men and
women. Biological Psychology, 161, 108073.
Bozzo, G., Barrasso, R., Marchetti, P., Roma, R., Samoilis, G., Tantillo,
G., & Ceci, E. (2018). Analysis of stress indicators for evalua-
tion of animal welfare and meat quality in traditional and Jewish
slaughtering. Animals, 8(4), 43.
Caviola, L., Everett, J. A., & Faber, N. S. (2019). The moral standing
of animals: Towards a psychology of speciesism. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 116(6), 1011–1029.
Cross, A. J., Leitzmann, M. F., Gail, M. H., Hollenbeck, A. R., Schatzkin,
A., & Sinha, R. (2007). A prospective study of red and processed
meat intake in relation to cancer risk. PLoS Medicine, 4(12), e325.
Jacka, F. N., Pasco, J. A., Williams, L. J., Mann, N., Hodge, A.,
Brazionis, L., & Berk, M. (2012). Red meat consumption and
mood and anxiety disorders. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics,
81(3), 196–198.
Jackson, L. M. (2019). Speciesism predicts prejudice against low-status
and hierarchy-attenuating human groups. Anthrozoös, 32(4), 445–458.
Johnson, W. L., Taylor, B. G., Mumford, E. A., & Liu, W. (2020).
Dyadic correlates of the perpetration of psychological aggres-
sion among intimate partners. Psychology of Violence, 10(4), 422.
Joy, M. (2009). Why we love dogs, eat pigs, and wear cows: An intro-
duction to carnism. Red Wheel.
Juarros Basterretxea, J., Overall, N., Herrero Olaizola, J. B., & Rod-
ríguez Díaz, F. J. (2019). Considering the effect of sexism on
psychological intimate partner violence: A study with imprisoned
men. European journal of psychology applied to legal. Context.
Larsson, S. C., & Wolk, A. (2006). Meat consumption and risk of
colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of prospective studies. Inter-
national Journal of Cancer, 119(11), 2657–2664.
Lovibond, P. F., & Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The structure of negative
emotional states: Comparison of the depression anxiety stress
scales (DASS) with the Beck depression and anxiety inventories.
Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33(3), 335–343.
Lynch, K. R., & Renzetti, C. M. (2020). Alcohol use, hostile sexism,
and religious self-regulation: Investigating risk and protective
factors of IPV perpetration. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,
35(17–18), 3237–3263.
Macdonald, J. (1963). The threat to kill. The American Journal of
Psychiatry, 120, 125–130. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1176/ ajp. 120.2. 125
Newton, R. R., Connelly, C. D., & Landsverk, J. A. (2001). An exami-
nation of measurement characteristics and factorial valdity of
the revised conflict tactics scale. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 61(2), 317–335.
Nguyen, D., & Parkhill, M. R. (2014). Integrating attachment and
depression in the confluence model of sexual assault perpetra-
tion. Violence Against Women, 20(8), 994–1011.
Nucci, D., Fatigoni, C., Amerio, A., Odone, A., & Gianfredi, V. (2020).
Red and processed meat consumption and risk of depression: A
systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(18), 6686.
Schauss, A. G. (1981). Diet, crime and delinquency (pp. 1–108). Parker
House.
Schoenthaler, S. J., & Bier, I. D. (1985). Diet and delinquency: Empiri-
cal testing of seven theories. International Journal of Biosocial
Research, 7(2), 108–131.
Schrock, D. P., & Padavic, I. (2007). Negotiating hegemonic masculin-
ity in a batterer intervention program. Gender & Society, 21(5),
625–649.
Shorey, R. C., Febres, J., Brasfield, H., & Stuart, G. L. (2012). The
prevalence of mental health problems in men arrested for domestic
violence. Journal of Family Violence, 27(8), 741–748.
Singer, P. (1975). Down on the factory farm. Animal liberation. A new
ethics for our treatment of animals (pp. 159–168). Avon Books.
The Hearst Corporation.
Straus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D. B.
(1996). The revised conflict tactics scales (CTS2): Development
and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17,
283–316.
Swogger, M. T., Walsh, Z., Houston, R. J., Cashman-Brown, S., &
Conner, K. R. (2010). Psychopathy and axis I psychiatric disor-
ders among criminal offenders: Relationships to impulsive and
proactive aggression. Aggressive Behavior: Official Journal of the
International Society for Research on Aggression, 36(1), 45–53.
Timeo, S., & Suitner, C. (2018). Eating meat makes you sexy: Con-
formity to dietary gender norms and attractiveness. Psychology
of Men & Masculinity, 19(3), 418.
Vang, A., Singh, P. N., Lee, J. W., Haddad, E. H., & Brinegar, C. H.
(2008). Meats, processed meats, obesity, weight gain and occur-
rence of diabetes among adults: Findings from Adventist health
studies. Annals of Nutrition and Metabolism, 52(2), 96–104.
Zhang, Y., Yang, Y., Xie, M. S., Ding, X., Li, H., Liu, Z. C., & Peng,
S. F. (2017). Is meat consumption associated with depression? A
meta-analysis of observational studies. BMC Psychiatry, 17(1),
1–7.
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Terms and Conditions
Springer Nature journal content, brought to you courtesy of Springer Nature Customer Service Center GmbH (“Springer Nature”).
Springer Nature supports a reasonable amount of sharing of research papers by authors, subscribers and authorised users (“Users”), for small-
scale personal, non-commercial use provided that all copyright, trade and service marks and other proprietary notices are maintained. By
accessing, sharing, receiving or otherwise using the Springer Nature journal content you agree to these terms of use (“Terms”). For these
purposes, Springer Nature considers academic use (by researchers and students) to be non-commercial.
These Terms are supplementary and will apply in addition to any applicable website terms and conditions, a relevant site licence or a personal
subscription. These Terms will prevail over any conflict or ambiguity with regards to the relevant terms, a site licence or a personal subscription
(to the extent of the conflict or ambiguity only). For Creative Commons-licensed articles, the terms of the Creative Commons license used will
apply.
We collect and use personal data to provide access to the Springer Nature journal content. We may also use these personal data internally within
ResearchGate and Springer Nature and as agreed share it, in an anonymised way, for purposes of tracking, analysis and reporting. We will not
otherwise disclose your personal data outside the ResearchGate or the Springer Nature group of companies unless we have your permission as
detailed in the Privacy Policy.
While Users may use the Springer Nature journal content for small scale, personal non-commercial use, it is important to note that Users may
not:
use such content for the purpose of providing other users with access on a regular or large scale basis or as a means to circumvent access
control;
use such content where to do so would be considered a criminal or statutory offence in any jurisdiction, or gives rise to civil liability, or is
otherwise unlawful;
falsely or misleadingly imply or suggest endorsement, approval , sponsorship, or association unless explicitly agreed to by Springer Nature in
writing;
use bots or other automated methods to access the content or redirect messages
override any security feature or exclusionary protocol; or
share the content in order to create substitute for Springer Nature products or services or a systematic database of Springer Nature journal
content.
In line with the restriction against commercial use, Springer Nature does not permit the creation of a product or service that creates revenue,
royalties, rent or income from our content or its inclusion as part of a paid for service or for other commercial gain. Springer Nature journal
content cannot be used for inter-library loans and librarians may not upload Springer Nature journal content on a large scale into their, or any
other, institutional repository.
These terms of use are reviewed regularly and may be amended at any time. Springer Nature is not obligated to publish any information or
content on this website and may remove it or features or functionality at our sole discretion, at any time with or without notice. Springer Nature
may revoke this licence to you at any time and remove access to any copies of the Springer Nature journal content which have been saved.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Springer Nature makes no warranties, representations or guarantees to Users, either express or implied
with respect to the Springer nature journal content and all parties disclaim and waive any implied warranties or warranties imposed by law,
including merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose.
Please note that these rights do not automatically extend to content, data or other material published by Springer Nature that may be licensed
from third parties.
If you would like to use or distribute our Springer Nature journal content to a wider audience or on a regular basis or in any other manner not
expressly permitted by these Terms, please contact Springer Nature at
onlineservice@springernature.com
... The consumption of flavor enhancers such as MSG might also influence behavior depending on the specific food to which it is added, such as meat. It is worth noting that emerging human research has linked higher levels of meat consumption with increased aggression toward an intimate partner (Taft et al. 2023). In animal studies, a high-fat, high-chicken-meat diet is associated with disturbances to the gut microbiota (Shi et al. 2020); if this research is replicated and extended, researchers should query the types of meat (highly processed, inclusive of dietary excitotoxins?), the types of foods that surround meat consumption (phytochemical-and fiber-rich fruits and vegetables, or ultra-processed foods?), and potential overlaps with addiction and microbiome sciences. ...
Article
Full-text available
Recent studies have illuminated the potential harms associated with ultra-processed foods, including poor mental health, aggression, and antisocial behavior. At the same time, the human gut microbiome has emerged as an important contributor to cognition and behavior, disrupting concepts of the biopsychosocial ‘self’ and raising questions related to free will. Since the microbiome is undeniably connected to dietary patterns and components, the topics of nutrition and microbes are of heightened interest to neuroscience and psychiatry. Research spanning epidemiology, mechanistic bench science, and human intervention trials has brought legitimacy to nutritional criminology and the idea that nutrition is of relevance to the criminal justice system. The individual and community-level relationships between nutrition and behavior are also salient to torts and the relatively new field of food crime—that which examines the vast harms, including grand-scale non-communicable diseases and behavioral outcomes, caused by the manufacturers, distributors, and marketers of ultra-processed food products. Here in this essay, we will synthesize various strands of research, reflecting this emergent science, using a notable case that straddled both neurolaw and food crime, Huberty v. McDonald’s (1987). It is our contention that the legalome—microbiome and omics science applied in neurolaw and forensics—will play an increasing role in 21st-century courtroom discourse, policy, and decision-making.
... Recent studies have identified associations between meat consumption and aggression (Sachdeva et al., 2018;Taft et al., 2023). On the other hand, studies have shown that concern for and empathy towards animals is positively associated with concern for and empathy towards humans (see Eleonora, 2017). ...
Article
Full-text available
In this transdisciplinary perspective, I present my initial ecospiritual thinking about the COVID-19 pandemic in a poem, titled Her Parasites. I identify with other thinkers-both those in science and not-who articulated ecophilosophical musings about the pandemic in various ways, some of whom were met with mockery and censure. In the hope that it will inspire openness and a sense of curiosity, I draw on metaphysical insights from Vedic treatises and the literature on environmental decline, zoonotic epidemiology, health science, animal agriculture, animal ethics, and animal sentience to explain my poem's philosophical and ecological framework. I focus on the scientific knowledge of epidemics caused by viruses that transcend species boundaries, why cross-species hopping occurs, and the nature (and incredible intelligence) of such viruses. I invite readers to consider ancient Vedic principles that articulate the rationale for living harmoniously with other sentient beings and entities. Considering the unseen metaphysical association between the pandemic and animal cruelty explained through the Vedic laws of Karmā, I present the possibility that one of the lessons Mother Earth might have wanted the Homo sapiens species to learn from the COVID-19 pandemic is its need to alter its diet. I end with a discussion on the possibility and value of this change. The downplaying or denial of animal sentience (strategies to overcome the psychological discomfort of incongruence between loving animals and eating them, as described in social psychology), is a barrier to this change. However, observed through a Vedic lens, this cognitive dissonance suggests that the Homo sapiens species is innately humane, the realisation of which might hold the key to this dietary change. URL: https://ecohumanism.co.uk/joe/ecohumanism/article/view/3201
Article
Full-text available
Depression is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide, with more than 264 million people affected. On average, depression first appears during the late teens to mid-20s as result of a complex interaction of social, psychological and biological factors. The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis is to assess the association between red and processed meat intake and depression (both incident and prevalent). This systematic review was conducted according to the methods recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Relevant papers published through March 2020 were identified by searching the electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus. All analyses were conducted using ProMeta3 software. A critical appraisal was conducted. Finally, 17 studies met the inclusion criteria. The overall effect size (ES) of depression for red and processed meat intake was 1.08 [(95% CI = 1.04; 1.12), p-value < 0.001], based on 241,738 participants. The results from our meta-analysis showed a significant association between red and processed meat intake and risk of depression. The presented synthesis will be useful for health professionals and policy makers to better consider the effect of diet on mental health status.
Article
Full-text available
Objectives: Using couple-level data and a multilevel actor-partner interdependence model, this study examined correlates of psychological aggression including problem drinking, illicit drug use, anxiety and depression, recent life stressors, love and caring, adverse childhood experiences (ACE) of emotional and physical abuse, with particular emphasis on the adoption of a “street code” perspective/attitude and low self-control. Method: Using a diverse sample derived from a national sample, self-reports of psychological aggression and its correlates were analyzed across 800 individuals (400 dyads) who were in a current heterosexual intimate partnership. Results: In multilevel analyses, psychological aggression was correlated with the individual’s risk factors and that of their partner for all variables except for problem drinking and illicit drug use. Although associations for both actor and partner were generally similar, partners’ reports of love and caring were more protective against respondents’ perpetration of psychological aggression. Furthermore, associations between psychological aggression and its covariates did not vary by gender. With the exception of self-control, actor effects did not interact with partner effects to buffer or amplify associations with psychological aggression. Conclusion: Our findings suggested that risk factors associated with the individual and those associated with the partner both contributed to each individual’s psychological aggression independent of the other. Future intimate partner violence studies should continue to explore dual interactive risk factors for both members of the intimate relationship in predicting aggression.
Article
Full-text available
Psychological intimate partner violence (IPV) is the most prevalent form of IPV and is often thought to precede physical IPV. However, psychological IPV often occurs independently of other forms of IPV, and it can often emerge during routine relationship interactions. Using data from imprisoned male offenders we investigate the effect of hostile and benevolent sexist attitudes on psychological IPV and the hypothesized mediating role of positive attitudes toward IPV and this effect when accounting for broader risk factors at the levels of community (social disorder), family-of-origin (conflictive climate in family of origin), and personality (antisocial personality traits) variables. The sample involved 196 male inmates of the Penitentiary Center of Villabona (Asturias, Spain). Structural equation models result showed significant total, direct and indirect effect of hostile sexism on psychological IPV, but not of benevolent sexism. When individual, family-of-origin, and community variables were considered, however, hostile sexism showed only an indirect effect on psychological IPV via positive attitudes toward abuse. These results are discussed in light of the debate of the role of sexist attitudes in the psychological IPV explanation when broader models are considered.
Article
Full-text available
Researchers have extensively studied the tendency of certain violent criminals to hurt or torture animals, primarily focusing on domestic abusers and serial killers. However, little is known about the extent or nature of prior animal abuse among active shooters and public mass shooters. Public mass and active shooters essentially represent a single offender type: they are people who commit rampage attacks in public places and attempt to harm multiple victims beyond a single target. The only difference is that “mass” shootings are traditionally defined as cases resulting in the death of four or more victims, while “active” shootings have no minimum threshold. This study aimed to identify all publicly reported cases of active and mass shooters who engaged in animal cruelty, describe the nature of their violence toward animals and humans, and examine how they differ from other perpetrators without this history. Overall, this study found 20 cases of offenders with a publicly reported history of animal abuse. Comparisons between offenders with and without this history indicated that animal‐abusing offenders were more likely to be young and White, less likely to die at the crime scene, and more likely to kill and wound a large number of victims. While this finding supports the idea that animal abuse might be a warning sign for a small but deadly minority of mostly youthful offenders, it is likely not a robust signal of future shooters in general because animal abuse is rarely reported in this population of offenders at large.
Article
Full-text available
Sixty Charolais male beef cattle of eight months of age were divided into two groups according to the slaughtering method, i.e., traditional or Kosher (religious Jewish rite). The aim of the study was to detect and compare the plasma concentrations of cortisol and catecholamines (dopamine, norepinephrine and epinephrine), by Elisa and HPLC test. These four stress indicators were evaluated during three different stages of each animal productive life: on the farm (step 1), after transportation (step 2) and during bleeding (step 3). The patterns of the parameters measured were similar and, interestingly, revealed significant changes throughout the three steps considered. The greatest variation between the two methods of slaughtering was observed in step 3, where we found a statistically significant difference with all the parameters except epinephrine. In the animals slaughtered by the religious rite, cortisol, dopamine, norepinephrine and epinephrine were 68.70 ± 30.61 nmol/L; 868.43 ± 508.52 ng/L; 3776.20 ± 1918.44 ng/L; and 4352.20 ± 3730.15 ng/L, respectively, versus 45.08 ± 14.15 nmol/L; 513.87 ± 286.32 ng/L; 3425.57 ± 1777.39 ng/L; and 3279.97 ± 1954.53 ng/L, respectively, in the other animals. This suggests that the animals slaughtered by the Kosher rite are subjected to higher stress conditions at the exsanguination phase. The animals slaughtered by the religious Jewish rite showed lower cortisol and catecholamine levels on the farm (step 1) and after transportation to the slaughterhouse (step 2). This was likely because the animals selected at the end of step 1 by the Rabbis for the religious rite are usually the most docile and gentle.
Article
Full-text available
We introduce and investigate the philosophical concept of ‘speciesism’ —the assignment of different moral worth based on species membership —as a psychological construct. In five studies, using both general population samples online and student samples, we show that speciesism is a measurable, stable construct with high interpersonal differences, that goes along with a cluster of other forms of prejudice, and is able to predict real-world decision-making and behavior. In Study 1 we present the development and empirical validation of a theoretically driven Speciesism Scale, which captures individual differences in speciesist attitudes. In Study 2, we show high test-retest reliability of the scale over a period of four weeks, suggesting that speciesism is stable over time. In Study 3, we present positive correlations between speciesism and prejudicial attitudes such as racism, sexism, homophobia, along with ideological constructs associated with prejudice such as social dominance orientation, system justification, and right-wing authoritarianism. These results suggest that similar mechanisms might underlie both speciesism and other well-researched forms of prejudice. Finally, in Studies 4 and 5, we demonstrate that speciesism is able to predict prosociality towards animals (both in the context of charitable donations and time investment) and behavioral food choices above and beyond existing related constructs. Importantly, our studies show that people morally value individuals of certain species less than others even when beliefs about intelligence and sentience are accounted for. We conclude by discussing the implications of a psychological study of speciesism for the psychology of human-animal relationships.
Article
Full-text available
Background: A number of epidemiological studies have examined the effect of meat consumption on depression. However, no conclusion has been reached. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between meat consumption and depression. Methods: The electronic databases of PUBMED and EMBASE were searched up to March 2017, for observational studies that examined the relationship between meat consumption and depression. The pooled odds ratio (OR) for the prevalence of depression and the relative risk (RR) for the incidence of depression, as well as their corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI), were calculated respectively (the highest versus the lowest category of meat consumption). Results: A total of eight observational studies (three cross-sectional, three cohort and two case-control studies) were included in this meta-analysis. Specifically, six studies were related to the prevalence of depression, and the overall multi-variable adjusted OR suggested no significant association between meat consumption and the prevalence of depression (OR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.65 to 1.22; P = 0.469). In contrast, for the three studies related to the incidence of depression, the overall multi-variable adjusted RR evidenced an association between meat consumption and a moderately higher incidence of depression (RR = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.24; P = 0.013). Conclusions: Meat consumption may be associated with a moderately higher risk of depression. However, it still warrants further studies to confirm such findings due to the limited number of prospective studies.
Article
Full-text available
Past research has highlighted links between meat consumption and masculine gender role norms such that meat consumers are generally attributed more masculine traits than their vegetable-consuming counterparts. However, the direct link between gender roles and men’s food choices has been somewhat neglected in the literature. Three studies conducted in Italy investigated this link between meat and masculinity. Studies 1 and 2 analyzed female mating preference for vegetarian and omnivorous partners, confirming that women preferred omnivorous men (Study 1 and 2), rated them as more attractive (Study 1 and 2), and felt more positive about them (Study 1) than vegetarians. Moreover Study 2 showed that the attribution of masculinity mediated this relationship, such that vegetarian men were considered less attractive because they were perceived as less masculine. Study 3 tested the relationship between the endorsement of food-related gender norms and food choices in a sample of Italian men. The results showed that men who perceived vegetarianism as feminine preferred meat-based dishes for themselves and expected their female partners to choose vegetarian dishes. Together, these findings show that gender role norms prescribing that men eat meat are actively maintained by both women and men and do in fact guide men’s food choices.
Article
Increasing evidence indicates that the interaction between testosterone and cortisol is associated with variation in aggressive behavior. However, results are mixed. The current study further explored the association between testosterone, cortisol, and both reactive and proactive aggression in a large sample of university students. Models considered direct and interactive effects between baseline measures of testosterone and cortisol as well as change in hormones in response to a social stressor. In women, baseline cortisol had a negative direct association with reactive aggression and was further associated with reactive aggression in interaction with baseline testosterone (positive interaction). Hormones were unrelated to reactive aggression in men. Baseline cortisol had a negative direct association with proactive aggression in women. In contrast, the association between change in cortisol and proactive aggression was positive. Cortisol was not associated with proactive aggression in men. In addition, testosterone was not related to proactive aggression either directly or in interaction with cortisol in either men or women. Collectively, these results show that the association between hormones and aggression varies across aggressive behavior type and across sex.
Article
A growing body of evidence demonstrates that attitudes toward nonhuman animals correlate with attitudes toward disadvantaged human groups. It has been suggested that the connection rests in the ideology of social dominance. Endorsement of social hierarchy and intergroup domination is thought to extend to both human intergroup and human– animal contexts. The present research tested this reasoning by examining the scope and basis of the relation between speciesism and human inter-group attitudes. It was hypothesized that speciesism would predict less positive attitudes toward low-status groups (e.g., disadvantaged ethnic minorities) and those who support social change (e.g., feminists) but that it would be uncorrelated with attitudes toward stigmatized groups that are unmarked by social status (e.g., atheists). Two studies (Study 1, n = 98; Study 2, n = 82) tested this prediction using survey measures of speciesism, social dominance orientation, and attitudes toward 31 human groups including those noted above. Participants were first- and second-year university students in a mid-sized university in Ontario, Canada. As hypothesized, in both studies speciesism predicted less positive attitudes primarily toward low-status groups and groups that support social change. Further, relations between speciesism and intergroup attitudes were explained by their shared connection with social dominance orientation. These data contribute to the growing body of evidence showing links between speciesism and prejudice by illustrating that their shared emphasis on support for social hierarchy gives rise to a specific pattern of intergroup attitudes—one that supports inequality.