Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorEvery, D.-
dc.contributor.authorDue, C.-
dc.contributor.authorThompson, K.-
dc.contributor.authorRyan, J.-
dc.identifier.citationSociety and Animals, 2016; 24(4):358-382-
dc.description.abstractNonhuman animal guardians are more at risk during natural disasters because they are likely to delay or refuse evacuation and return to evacuated disaster sites to rescue animals. Research on the human-animal bond (HAB) views animal guardians’ actions as a reflection of a strong attachment. However, in addition to guardians, disaster planners, rescue personnel, and other community members influence which animals are saved and how. As Irvine (2009) noted, the way people and institutions think about different animals precedes which animals are included in disaster efforts, and when and how these animals are included. This paper considers how media articles on animal rescues use moral evaluations of animals to justify or challenge people’s actions in saving or not saving animals. We found that the multiple moral evaluations of animals and animal rescue were a source of misunderstanding and conflict during and after a disaster.-
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityDanielle Every, Clemence Due, Kirrilly Thompson, Jillian Ryan-
dc.rights© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2016-
dc.subjectCompanion animals; wildlife; livestock; natural disaster; animal rescue; socio-zoologic scale; human-animal bond-
dc.titleConflicting perspectives on nonhuman animal rescues in natural disasters-
dc.typeJournal article-
dc.identifier.orcidDue, C. [0000-0001-6485-6076]-
Appears in Collections:Aurora harvest 8
Psychology publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.