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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Katelyn E Mills, Zetta Han, Jesse Robbins, Daniel M Weary
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