Attitudes to the use of animals in biomedical research: Effects of stigma and selected research project summaries

PLOS ONE RESEARCH ARTICLE Attitudes to the use of animals in biomedical research: Effects of stigma and selected research project summaries Helen J. Cassaday ID1*, Lucy Cavenagh1, Hiruni Aluthgamage1, Aoife Crooks1, Charlotte Bonardi1, Carl W. Stevenson2, Lauren Waite1, Charlotte Muir1,3 a1111111111 a1111111111 a1111111111 a1111111111 a1111111111 OPEN ACCESS Citation: Cassaday HJ, Cavenagh L, Aluthgamage H, Crooks A, Bonardi C, Stevenson CW, et al. (2023) Attitudes to the use of animals in biomedical research: Effects of stigma and selected research project summaries. PLoS ONE 18(8): e0290232. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0290232 Editor: Ali B. Mahmoud, St John’s University, UNITED STATES Received: March 22, 2023 Accepted: August 6, 2023 Published: August 18, 2023 Peer Review History: PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process; therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. The editorial history of this article is available here: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0290232 Copyright: © 2023 Cassaday et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Data Availability Statement: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files, and are also deposited in the University of 1 School of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom, 2 School of Biosciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom, 3 School of Physiology, Pharmacology, and Neuroscience, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom * Abstract Three groups of participants (largely recruited from the UK) completed a survey to examine attitudes to the use of animals in biomedical research, after reading the lay (N = 182) or technical (N = 201) summary of a research project, or no summary (N = 215). They then completed a survey comprising the animal attitude (AAS), animal purpose (APQ), belief in animal mind (BAM) and empathy quotient (EQ) scales. The APQ was adapted to assess attitudes towards the use of animals for research into disorders selected to be perceived as controllable and so ‘blameworthy’ and potentially stigmatised (addiction and obesity) and ‘psychological’ (schizophrenia and addiction) versus ‘physical’ (cardiovascular disease and obesity), across selected species (rats, mice, fish pigs and monkeys). Thus, the APQ was used to examine how the effects of perceived controllability and the nature of the disorder affected attitudes to animal use, in different species and in the three summary groups. As expected, attitudes to animal use as measured by the AAS and the APQ (total) correlated positively with BAM and EQ scores, consistent with the assumption that the scales all measured pro-welfare attitudes. Participants in the two research summary groups did not differentiate the use of rats, mice and fish (or fish and pigs in the technical summary group), whereas all species were differentiated in the no summary group. Participants given the lay summary were as concerned about the use of animals for schizophrenia as for addiction research. APQ ratings otherwise indicated more concern for animals used for addiction research (and for obesity compared to cardiovascular disease in all summary groups). Therefore, the information provided by a research project summary influenced attitudes to use of animals in biomedical research. However, there was no overall increase in agreement with animal use in either of the summary groups. Introduction Attitudes to the use of animals in biomedical research are influenced by a host of cultural factors, from economic metrics such as a country’s gross domestic product [1], to more individual PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0290232 August 18, 2023 1 / 22 PLOS ONE Nottingham Research Data Repository (doi: 10. 17639/nott.7305), to be made freely available postpublication. Funding: This work was in part supported by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council https://www.ukri.org/councils/bbsrc/ [grant number BB/S000119/1] awarded to HJC, CWS and CB. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Competing interests: This study examines the effectiveness of project summaries outlining a plan of work supported by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [grant number BB/S000119/1] as moderators of attitudes to animal use. The BBSRC had no further role in the study. The authors have declared that no individual competing interests exist. Attitudes to animal use, stigma and research project summaries factors such as rural versus urban background and personality [2]. Secondary analyses of data from national surveys conducted across Europe showed that (amongst other factors) the level of scientific information provided on new medical discoveries was positively associated with the acceptance of animal experimentation [1]. However, systematic evidence on the influence of information, such as that provided by positive media coverage and public engagement activities, is lacking [1, 2]. Barriers to the general public’s lay understanding of animal research include the accessibility of communications provided by biomedical scientists, which may relate to the lack of training, as well as the perception of risk from animal activism [3]. Lay summaries of science should in principle provide a cost-effective resource for promoting public understanding [4–6]. Summaries of publicly funded research are widely available and openly accessible online, for example, via UK Research and Innovation https://gtr.ukri. org/, but there is little evidence as to their effectiveness in promoting the public understanding of science in general, or in mitigating prejudices pertaining to areas of biomedical research. To address this gap, the present study examined the effects of reading selected summaries on attitudes towards animal use in the context of lay beliefs about controllability, blameworthiness and the stigma that may be associated with different health conditions. Stigma and blame Stigma involves the exclusion or discrimination of someone based on a label attributed to them, for example an illness [7–9]. Stigma may prevent those affected from contacting the appropriate services for help, as well as reduce the public contribution towards research funding for mental health [10]. Stereotyped negative preconceptions of those with mental illness are found even amongst mental health professionals [8], and medical and psychology students [11]. Psychoeducational interventions (information brochures and video presentations) have decreased aspects of negative stereotyping [11], and more positive attitude (...truncated)