Attitudes toward Animals and Their Welfare among Italian Veterinary Students

Abstract

As members of the public and the veterinary profession are increasingly concerned about animal welfare, there has been an increased scholarly interest in the attitudes of veterinarians and students toward animals, as these may impact human behavior, which ultimately impacts animal welfare. Here we investigated Italian veterinary students' demographic data and perceptions about nonhuman animal welfare issues that might be predictive of their attitudes. A survey eliciting information about demographics, knowledge, experience, and perceptions regarding different categories of animals, and including the Animal Attitude Scale (AAS), was administered to undergraduate veterinary medicine students in three Italian universities. Data were analyzed using nonparametric tests, and a value of p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. In total, 876 students completed the questionnaire, with females (75.1%) making up a majority of students in all years of the course. Although veterinary students showed pro-animal welfare attitudes (mean score = 64.20 ± 0.24 out of 100), the findings suggested that year of study, gender, and geographical location had a significant impact (p < 0.05). In this study, we found a set of factors that, either individually or combined, help predict a student's attitude toward animal welfare issues, which will be useful in improving the curriculum strategy in veterinary education in Italy.

Keywords: animal welfare; attitude toward animals; veterinary students.

Figure 1

Comparison of mean ± standard error (SE) percentage of maximum possible (POMP) score of the Animal Attitude Scale (AAS) by year of course. Data were represented determining an exponential regression model equation and analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis test with Bonferroni’s correction (* = significant difference vs year 1 and 2; p = 0.001).

Figure 2

(a) Mean ± SE POMP score of AAS by students’ provenance; (b) Mean ± SE POMP score by students’ university. Data were analyzed using a Kruskal–Wallis test with Bonferroni’s correction (p = 0.001) (* = significant difference vs the other two groups). POMP: Percentage of maximum possible score; AAS: Animal Attitude Scale.

Figure 3

Mean ± SE POMP scores of the four subscales of AAS as suggested by Gazzano et al. [6]. Data were analyzed using a Kruskal–Wallis test with Bonferroni’s correction (p = 0.001) (* = significant difference vs Research and Food). POMP: Percentage of maximum possible score.

Figure 4

Students’ scoring tendency on animal Research subscale by year of course. Data were represented determining an exponential regression model equation. POMP: Percentage of maximum possible score.

Figure 5

Animal Research subscale’s mean ± SE POMP score by students’ provenance. Data were analyzed using a Kruskal–Wallis test with Bonferroni’s correction (p = 0.001) (* = significant difference vs the other two groups). POMP: Percentage of maximum possible score.