BUSCADOR RECOLECTA

Whereas a variety of attributes has been empirically associated to the social perception of animals, the identification of the underlying fundamental dimensions has been infrequent. Rooted in the stereotype content conceptualization and using multidimensional scaling, we explore the dimensions in which people organize animal targets based on how humans relate to them. Asking about the similarity in which humans relate to animals, participants rated thirty-four salient animals (from a pilot study; N = 76) using Likert scales in Study 1 (N = 108) and grouping similar animals in Study 2 (N = 112). A 3-dimension scaling solution fitted adequately the data (S-Stress < .15) and Study 3 aimed to interpret those dimensions using independently rated animals’ attributes (N = 176) through regression analysis. Results showed the relevance of relational nature – ferocity, wildness, avoidance/approach, warmth, and physical capacity – size, strength; whereas animal’s competence were less important. The findings signal a) the predominance of two dimensions for how people organize spontaneously animals – relational nature and physical capacity; and b) the similarity between stereotype content dimensions for animals and social groups. Implications for human-animal relations, conservation and environmental issues toward animal are advance.

Data from pilot and three studies. Pilot Study: List of salient animal species through an open-ended question (N = 76 Spanish college participants).

• Study 1: Similarity measures (7 point Likert-type scale, 1 is completely different, 7 completely similar) between 34 animal species based on how people relate to them (N = 108 Spanish college participants).
• Study 2: Similarity measures (card sorting task, 0 if the species do not appear together, 1 if they do appear together) between 34 animal species based on how people relate to them (N = 112 college participants).
• Study 3: Ratings (7 point Likert-type scale) of the 34 animal species in 11 relevant attributes (N = 176 Spanish college participants).

Se incluyen los datos de dos estudios y dos estudios piloto: Estudio 1: Estudio correlacional (N = 144 participantes) que evalúa las características, a través de pregunta abierta, que las personas adscriben a los lobos (estereotipos), la valencia de cada característica (+3 a -3) y su consenso percibido (0 a 100%). Estudio 2: Estudio correlacional (N = 199) que evalúa las características, a través de pregunta abierta, que las personas adscriben a los osos pardos (estereotipos), la valencia de cada característica (+3 a -3) y su consenso percibido (0 a 100%). Estudio piloto 1: se elabora un esquema de codificación para analizar las características mencionadas de los lobos del Estudio 1. Estudio piloto 2: se elabora un esquema de codificación para analizar las características mencionadas de los osos del Estudio 2.

Using the stereotype content model (SCM; Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002) and the behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes (BIAS) map (Cuddy, Fiske, & Glick, 2007), two experiments tested the effect of animal stereotypes on emotions and behavioral tendencies toward animals. The approach aims to understand the diversity of human-animal relations according to differential perceptions of animal species in terms of stereotypes, prejudices, and behaviors. The pattern of relations between stereotypes, emotions, and behavioral intentions advanced by SCM and the adapted BIAS map for animals was experimentally tested in Study 1 by presenting a fictitious animal and systematically varying its levels of warmth and competence. Study 2 tested the different patterns of associations between the stereotypes of twenty-five animal species and realistic contexts triggering facilitation-harm and passive-active behavioral dimensions. A questionnarie was carried out asking participants (159) to rate each scenario on the intentionality/unintentionality of the action described (perceived intent) and on the benefit-harm of the action (perceived benefit).