Towards a critical psychology of human–animal relations

Abstract

This article argues that critical psychological engagement with the field of human-animal relations is largely absent, but of potential significance, and begins to outline more concretely what such a perspective might contribute, especially as a form of social psychology. The article provides a brief overview of the emerging psychology of human-animal relations and the extent to which it emphasises situated human-animal interactions in real-world settings, including from the standpoint of animal participants. Recent elaborations of the "animal turn" outside of the discipline of psychology are considered, as they place fresh emphasis on human-animal interaction and interdependence and might further extend the boundaries of what counts as relations that matter in critical and social psychology.These foundations are argued to offer an invitation to critical psychology to engage more fully in the study of human-animal relations and enliven it as a result.

“Animals are friends, not food”: Anthropomorphism leads to less favorable attitudes toward meat consumption by inducing feelings of anticipatory guilt

“…In tandem with spreading scientific knowledge about how sentient and intelligent meat animals are, organizations may be well advised to consider anthropomorphizing meat animals through the "animals are friends" metaphor. This metaphor could help craft a communication strategy to challenge carnism (Monteiro et al, 2017), speciesism (Caviola et al, 2018) and the traditional human-animal divide (Adams, 2018;Bastian et al, 2012a), and, hence, facilitate animal protection, reduce meat consumption and, incidentally, promote a more sustainable plant-based diet worldwide (Springmann et al, 2018).…”

The effects of interacting with fish in aquariums on human health and well-being: A systematic review

“…Finally, future research should consider the impact of human-fish interactions on the animals involved. At present, much research into the health benefits of HAI has focused on human well-being, an approach which has been criticised as being human-centred [103,104]. Some researchers have therefore argued for a greater emphasis on the reciprocal nature of HAI, with animals considered active participants in human-animal encounters [20,104].…”

“…At present, much research into the health benefits of HAI has focused on human well-being, an approach which has been criticised as being human-centred [103,104]. Some researchers have therefore argued for a greater emphasis on the reciprocal nature of HAI, with animals considered active participants in human-animal encounters [20,104]. While research with other species (typically dogs) has begun to investigate the impact of HAI on the animals involved, the effects of human-fish interaction on the fish involved were largely absent from the studies in this review.…”

The kingdom of dogs: Understanding Pavlov’s experiments as human–animal relationships

“…Theoretically (especially in terms of ontology), it seeks to show a growing understanding of multi-species interrelatedness, including animals, but often extending to other nonhuman forms, beings, things, places, and elements of the more-than-human world. It is effectively an attempt to develop a relational ontology within a theoretical framework that can incorporate human and nonhuman as being distinct but mutually constitutive and interdependent (M. Adams, 2018).…”

“…This article is an attempt to take up this task. Elsewhere I have argued for the kind of critical psychology that is needed to meaningfully contribute to an interdisciplinary and fast-developing HAS—staking claims for the necessary theoretical and methodological tools (M. Adams, 2018).…”