Direct Versus Indirect Questioning: An Application to the Well-Being of Farm Animals
- 527 Downloads
Recent events suggest people are increasingly concerned not just with their own well-being but that of animals as well. However, there is little systematic evidence on people’s willingness-to-trade their own well-being and quality of life for improvements in the well-being of farm animals. In this paper, we utilize a straightforward and unobtrusive technique to mitigate socially desirability effects and gage the publics’ opinion about farm animal welfare: indirect questioning. In survey of United States households, we find sharp differences between direct and indirect questions related to farm animal welfare. For example, whereas only 15.6% of the public said they think low meat prices are more important than the well-being of farm animals, 67.5% said the average American thinks low meat prices are more important than the well-being of farm animals. This finding, coupled with the extant literature on indirect questioning, suggests that people’s concerns for farm animal welfare are actually much lower than what they say they are.
KeywordsAnimal welfare Indirect questioning Social desirability bias
- Broom, D. M., & Johnson, K. G. (1993). Stress and animal welfare. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
- Farm Foundation (2006). Future of animal agriculture in North America. Oak Brook, IL: Farm Foundation. Available online at (Last accessed 8/17/07): http://www.farmfoundation.org/projects/documents/AnimalWelfare_000.pdf.
- Fields, J.M., & Schuman, H. (1976–1977). Public beliefs about the beliefs of the public. Public Opinion Quarterly, 40, 427–448. doi: 10.1086/268330.
- Fisher, R. J., & Katz, J. E. (2000). Social-desirability bias and the validity of self-reported values. Psychology and Marketing, 17, 105–120. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(200002)17:2<105::AID-MAR3>3.0.CO;2-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Greene, W. H. (2000). Econometric analysis (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Herbert, J. R., Ma, Y., Clemow, L., Ockene, I., Saperia, G., Stanek, E. J., et al. (1997). Gender differences in social desirability and social approval bias in dietary self-report. American Journal of Epidemiology, 146, 1046–1055.Google Scholar
- Hoffman, E., McCabe, K., Shachat, K., & Smith, V. (1996). Social distance and other-regarding behavior in dictator games. The American Economic Review, 86, 653–660.Google Scholar
- Huppert, F. A., Marks, N., Clark, A. E., Siegrist, J., Stutzer, A., Vittersø, J., & Wahrendorf, M. (2009). Measuring well-being across Europe: Description of the ESS well-being module and preliminary findings. Social Indicators Research, 91, 301–315. doi: 10.1007/s11205-008-9346-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lusk, J. L., & Norwood, F. B. (2009a). An inferred valuation method. Land Economics, (forthcoming).Google Scholar
- Maccoby, E. E., & Maccoby, N. (1954). The interview: A tool of social science. In G. Lindzey (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 449–487). Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
- Reagan, T. (2004). The case of animal rights. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Singer, P. (2002). Animal liberation. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
- Sunstein, C. R., & Nussbaum, M. C. (2004). Animal rights: Current debates and new directions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar