Abstract
The animal purpose questionnaire (APQ) is a new instrument to measure human attitudes to animal use systematically across both species and purpose of use. This offers a more fine-grained approach to our understanding of how the belief in a specific animal's mental capacities relates to (dis-)agreement with their use for different human purposes. In the present study, 317 participants completed an online survey containing the APQ and the belief in animal mind (BAM) scale in a species-specific format, to test the prediction that levels of (dis-)agreement with animal use should mirror participants' judgements of animal sentience. The results obtained with the APQ confirmed that attitudes to animal use differed significantly across both purpose and species. Key findings included a relatively greater concern for dolphins and dogs over chimpanzees (suggesting that phylogenetic position is not the only determinant of attitudes to animal use). Across the purposes examined, respondents were largely negative about animal usage, with the exception that there was less disagreement if this was for medical research. Participants were also asked to provide demographic details such as gender and dietary preference. Regression analyses revealed high predictive power for species-specific BAM across five different kinds of animal use. General BAM scores, non-meat-eating and being female accounted for 31.5% of the total variability in APQ scores. The results indicate that BAM is a strong predictor of self-reported attitudes for using particular animals. However, the results showed some exceptions in the case of culturally typical 'produce' animals.