Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jan 3;19(1):e0295503.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0295503. eCollection 2024.

Public controversy and citizens' attitude formation about animal research: A case for scholarship and recommendations on conflicts at the science-society interface

Elena Link  1 , Katharina Emde-Lachmund  2 , Sophie Bruns  2 , Anja Dittrich  2 , Meike Stiesch  3 , Axel Haverich  4 , Stefan Treue  5   6 , Christoph Klimmt  2
Affiliations

Public controversy and citizens' attitude formation about animal research: A case for scholarship and recommendations on conflicts at the science-society interface

Elena Link et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Activist groups attack animal research and put scientists and their institutions under pressure, whereas scientists often remain silent. We report an interdisciplinary research project driven by a communication science perspective on how citizens respond to news reports about animal research (3 experiments, overall N = 765) and a German science-initiated information platform ("Tierversuche verstehen"; controlled user study, N = 100). Findings demonstrate that a critical journalist perspective within neutral, two-sided news reports (e.g., skeptical expert statements or images of suffering animals) does not affect citizen opinion strongly. Information media provided by scientific institutions seem to be welcomed even by citizens who hold critical prior attitudes. From these results, we develop a set of recommendations for future public communication of animal research that builds on best practices in organizational and crisis communication. These suggestions are intended to empower animal researchers to actively participate in public debate to support citizens' informed attitude formation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

References

    1. Munro L. Strategies, Action Repertoires and DIY Activism in the Animal Rights Movement. Social Movement Studies. 2005;4:75–94. doi: 10.1080/14742830500051994 - DOI
    1. Beversdorf DQ, Roos RP, Hauser WA, Lennon VA, Mehler MF. Animal extremists‘ threats to neurologic research continue: Neuroreality II. Neurology. 2015;85:730–4. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000001764 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Abbott A. Biomedicine: the changing face of primate research. Nature. 2014;506:24–6. doi: 10.1038/506024a - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fernández L. The Emotional politics of images: moral shock, explicit violence and strategic visual communication in the animal liberation movement. Journal for Critical Animal Studies. 2020;17:53–80.
    1. Schultz J. Reviving the fourth estate: Democracy, accountability, and the media. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998.