Institutional transparency improves public perception of lab animal technicians and support for animal research.
The use of animals in research is controversial and often takes place under a veil of secrecy. Lab animal technicians responsible for the care of animals at research institutions are sometimes described as performing 'dirty work' (i.e. professions that are viewed as morally tainted), and m...
Main Authors: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2018-01-01
|
Series: | PLoS ONE |
Online Access: | http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5821381?pdf=render |
id |
doaj-f65cc65536bd4f6db0926705e0b3d106 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-f65cc65536bd4f6db0926705e0b3d1062020-11-25T02:08:05ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032018-01-01132e019326210.1371/journal.pone.0193262Institutional transparency improves public perception of lab animal technicians and support for animal research.Katelyn E MillsZetta HanJesse RobbinsDaniel M WearyThe use of animals in research is controversial and often takes place under a veil of secrecy. Lab animal technicians responsible for the care of animals at research institutions are sometimes described as performing 'dirty work' (i.e. professions that are viewed as morally tainted), and may be stigmatized by negative perceptions of their job. This study assessed if transparency affects public perceptions of lab animal technicians and support for animal research. Participants (n = 550) were randomly assigned to one of six scenarios (using a 3x2 design) that described identical research varying only the transparency of the facility (low, high) and the species used (mice, dogs, cows). Participants provided Likert-type and open-ended responses to questions about the personal characteristics (warmth, competence) of a hypothetical lab technician 'Cathy' and their support for the described research. Quantitative analysis showed participants in the low-transparency condition perceived Cathy to be less warm and were less supportive of the research regardless of animal species. Qualitative responses varied greatly, with some participants expressing support for both Cathy and the research. These results suggest that increasing transparency in lab animal institutions could result in a more positive perception of lab animal researchers and the work that they do.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5821381?pdf=render |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Katelyn E Mills Zetta Han Jesse Robbins Daniel M Weary |
spellingShingle |
Katelyn E Mills Zetta Han Jesse Robbins Daniel M Weary Institutional transparency improves public perception of lab animal technicians and support for animal research. PLoS ONE |
author_facet |
Katelyn E Mills Zetta Han Jesse Robbins Daniel M Weary |
author_sort |
Katelyn E Mills |
title |
Institutional transparency improves public perception of lab animal technicians and support for animal research. |
title_short |
Institutional transparency improves public perception of lab animal technicians and support for animal research. |
title_full |
Institutional transparency improves public perception of lab animal technicians and support for animal research. |
title_fullStr |
Institutional transparency improves public perception of lab animal technicians and support for animal research. |
title_full_unstemmed |
Institutional transparency improves public perception of lab animal technicians and support for animal research. |
title_sort |
institutional transparency improves public perception of lab animal technicians and support for animal research. |
publisher |
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
series |
PLoS ONE |
issn |
1932-6203 |
publishDate |
2018-01-01 |
description |
The use of animals in research is controversial and often takes place under a veil of secrecy. Lab animal technicians responsible for the care of animals at research institutions are sometimes described as performing 'dirty work' (i.e. professions that are viewed as morally tainted), and may be stigmatized by negative perceptions of their job. This study assessed if transparency affects public perceptions of lab animal technicians and support for animal research. Participants (n = 550) were randomly assigned to one of six scenarios (using a 3x2 design) that described identical research varying only the transparency of the facility (low, high) and the species used (mice, dogs, cows). Participants provided Likert-type and open-ended responses to questions about the personal characteristics (warmth, competence) of a hypothetical lab technician 'Cathy' and their support for the described research. Quantitative analysis showed participants in the low-transparency condition perceived Cathy to be less warm and were less supportive of the research regardless of animal species. Qualitative responses varied greatly, with some participants expressing support for both Cathy and the research. These results suggest that increasing transparency in lab animal institutions could result in a more positive perception of lab animal researchers and the work that they do. |
url |
http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5821381?pdf=render |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT katelynemills institutionaltransparencyimprovespublicperceptionoflabanimaltechniciansandsupportforanimalresearch AT zettahan institutionaltransparencyimprovespublicperceptionoflabanimaltechniciansandsupportforanimalresearch AT jesserobbins institutionaltransparencyimprovespublicperceptionoflabanimaltechniciansandsupportforanimalresearch AT danielmweary institutionaltransparencyimprovespublicperceptionoflabanimaltechniciansandsupportforanimalresearch |
_version_ |
1724927605378908160 |