Animals are used by humans in many ways, yet science has paid little attention to the study of human-animal relationships (Melson 2002). In the present study participants (n= 96) completed a questionnaire on attitudes towards animal use and individual differences were examined to determine which characteristics might underlie these attitudes ('belief in animal mind', age, gender, experience of animals, vegetarianism, political stance, and living area). It emerged that participants held different views for different types of animal use, and that belief in animal mind (BAM) was a powerful and consistent predictor of these attitudes, with BAM together with gender and vegetarianism predicting up to 37% of the variance in attitudes towards animal use.Thus future research should acknowledge the importance of BAM as a major underlying factor of attitudes towards animal use, and should also distinguish between different types of animal use when measuring attitudes. We proposed that the large effect of BAM might be due to increasing interest in animal mind over the past decade.

Purpose. The present survey examined the beliefs of different occupational groups (police officers, social workers, teachers) and members of the general public about (i) cues to deception in young children (5‐ to 6‐year‐olds), adolescents (14‐ to 15‐year‐olds) and adults, and (ii) the underlying processes (emotions, cognitive load and attempted verbal and behavioural control), which may explain why cues to deceit do occur. Method. Two hundred and six participants completed a ‘cues to deception’ and ‘processes underlying deception’ questionnaire for three different age groups (young children, adolescents and adults). Results and discussion. The survey revealed that participants believed that liars are nervous, have difficulties in formulating their lies and do not fully endorse their lies. In general, participants associated more cues with deception than seems justified on the basis of deception literature. Participants generally associated the same cues to deceit for all three age groups but, when differences between age groups did emerge, this was most likely to be amongst teachers. Although participants believed that adults control their speech and behaviour more when they lie than adolescents and young children do, this did not result in participants believing that adults exhibit fewer cues to deceit. No major occupational differences emerged, although out of the four participating groups, teachers were most likely to associate cues with deception in young children.

Animal use" is a contentious topic that refers to practices involving the utilization of non-human animals by human beings. These practices often evoke strong and emotional reactions from opposing parties, and individuals can hold incongruent views concerning different ways in which animals are used. Yet previous research in this area has tended to portray attitudes toward animal use as uni-dimensional (rather than distinguishing between different types of use), and the field has been dominated by quantitative approaches that focus on participant characteristics such as gender, age, and so on, in order to explain variance in people's views on this topic. The present study assumed that attitudes are not uni-dimensional and applied Grounded Theory Methodology in order to determine psychological factors that underlie people's views concerning animal use issues. Eight participant-led interviews explored the factors that people consider when rationalizing their attitudes toward the use of animals, and interview transcripts were analyzed with an aim to understanding why attitudes vary depending upon the type of animal use in question. Three key themes were identified, labelled as "type of animal used," "purpose of animal use," and "knowledge of animal use." These represent beliefs concerning animals and animal use, and help explain why people can support some animal use practices whilst opposing others. We conclude that taking a psychological approach in order to further examine the beliefs that underlie attitudes provides a way forward for future research.

Scientists have been portrayed as having an uncaring attitude toward the use of animals and being inclined to reject the possibility of animal mind, yet there is little empirical research to support these claims. We examined why disparate attitudes toward animal use are held. Scientists, animal welfarists, and laypersons (N = 372) were compared on questionnaire responses that measured attitudes toward four types of animal use, and factors that might underlie these views (including belief in animal mind). As expected, scientists and animal welfarists held polarized views on all measures, whereas laypersons fell between the two. Animal welfarists were consistently opposed to all types of animal use, whereas scientists expressed support for the use of animals for medical research, but not for dissection, personal decoration, and entertainment. Animal welfarists showed high levels of belief in animal mind for 13 animal types, and scientists believed some of the 13 animals to have at least a moderate capacity for cognition and most to have at least a moderate capacity for sentience. Hence, the negative image of the science community that is often portrayed was not supported by our data. Findings were discussed in relation to external (group membership) and internal (belief systems) factors, and it is concluded that some people hold fixed attitudes toward animal use, whereas others are more influenced by context.

The social and community consequences of promoting dog ownership in the elderly are addressed, and it is concluded that the benefits of dog ownership should be promoted among the elderly and acknowledged by relevant agencies.