Anthrozoology is a bit of a broad term. In the animal behaviour world, it often refers to the psychology of the relationship, similarities and differences between humans and other animals. For example, Bowlby & Ainsworth’s secure attachment theory: that children with a secure attachment to a caregiver demonstrate confidence with a stranger that a child without a secure attachment often lacks. This is recognised in dogs too, those who had a secure attachment with their first human were found to settle more easily if re-homed.

My Master’s training then approached the subject from a social and cultural perspective, exploring  what meanings and value do different societies, cultures and communities place on animals and how this might affect how animals are treated.

Here’s a simple example of how language and meaning can affect an animal.

In the equine world horses are often categorised: working, pet and competition are some examples.  These aren’t simple labels without effect.  The way the horse is thought about shifts based on the label, different needs might be ascribed to the horse as a result of the category, or it might even justify certain treatment for the same reason.  All the while, the actual welfare needs and experience of the horse remain unaltered. 

Humans naturally construct meaning, use labels and symbolic thinking. It’s not a flaw, simply a characteristic of our species.   Labels, categories and the ascribed meanings that arise from them is complex.   It’s not a simple cognitive process but rooted in culture, traditions, religion, communities, needs, even mythology.  

The complexity of human society and the words we use is crucial to thinking about and understanding how to communicate ideas, strategise and plan to create change for animal welfare rather than simply say ‘educate’.