Marketing Research Study By: Patrick Malone Jay Brown Brynne Gaffney Lindsey Black Bethany Critchley The Inhumane Treatment of Animals.

Marketing Research Study

By:Patrick Malone

Jay BrownBrynne GaffneyLindsey Black

Bethany Critchley

The Inhumane Treatment of Animals

Franklin Pierce University is a small, private regionally accredited University grounded in the liberal arts, with a focus on personal attention and high-quality instruction.

The college at Rindge consists of 1,400 undergraduate students.

Introduction

Background:

We are conducting research to determine whether students at Franklin Pierce consider the inhumane treatment of animals when purchasing consumer products and services.

Problem Statement

Access the literature related to using inhumane practices on animals when developing products.

Determine the awareness level of the inhumane treatment of animals.

Determine student opinions and attitudes related to inhumane treatment of animals.

Research Objectives

Animal welfare- the avoidance of abuse and exploitation of animals by humans by maintaining appropriate standards of accommodation, feeding and general care, the prevention and treatment of disease, and the assurance of freedom of harassment, and unnecessary discomfort and pain

Animal cruelty- the crime of inflicting physical pain, suffering, or death on an animal, usually a tame one, beyond necessity for normal discipline

Inhumane treatment- a cruel act; a deliberate infliction of pain and suffering

Animal testing- the use of non-human animals in research and development projects, especially for purposes determining the safety of substances such as food or drugs

Animal Feedlot Operations- agricultural operations where animals are kept and raised in confined situations

Definitions

Inhumane Animal Treatment for Biomedical Research• 1937- “Elixir Sulfanilamide” was put on the

market- over 100 deaths occurred. • Due to this incident and many others, animal

experimentation was developed in the biomedical industry.(4)

• In the US alone, millions of animals are tested per year. Only 5% of the drugs that show potential in animals

ever get licensed for human use. ()

Literature Review

Inhumane Animal Treatment in the Fashion Industry In recent years, the influence of animal welfare

groups has played a major role in swaying customer values.

The use of technologies such as television and internet has allowed these groups to reach a larger group of people.

One 2008 study found that a growing population (19%) of the sample, were motivated to purchase clothing based on an animal welfare designation.()

Literature Review, cont’d

Inhumane Animal Treatment in Entertainment Examples: horse racing, dog racing, dog

fighting, circuses, zoo’s, etc.. Often times these forms of entertainment stay

out of the public eye. Ex: “Hog Dog Rodeo.” (2)

Literature Review, cont’d

Inhumane Animal Treatment in the Food Industry Pilgrims Pride plant in Moorefield, West

Virginia. Supplies to KFC Video Released by an undercover animal rights

activist said to “contain some of the worst scenes of animal cruelty ever witnessed.” (7)

Literature Review, cont’d

Inhumane Animal Treatment in the Food Industry, cont’d Heather McLeod-Kilmurray created a study

titled “Commoditizing Non-human Animals and their Consumers: Industrial livestock production, animal welfare, and ecological justice.”(6)

Looks into the effects of Factory Farming

Literature Review, cont’d

Inhumane Animal Treatment in the Cosmetics Industry. Animals such as rabbits, pigs, mice, rats, and

dogs are used in cosmetic product testing. Many products today are labeled “cruelty

free,” although often times this is only referring to the finished product. (5)

Literature Review, cont’d

Problem Identification The problem that the research group identified was

that students of Franklin Pierce University may not be aware of the treatment and overall welfare of animals used for the production of consumer products and services.

Development of Survey Group determined topics most crucial to research Conducted a literature review Used Literature review and research objectives to

create 14 questions to future our research

Methodology

Definition of Population Student body at Franklin Pierce University on

the Rindge campus Current student body is approximately 1,400

undergraduate Sample Size

160 students 20 male and 20 females from each class

Methodology cont’d

Data Collection Method Group used non-probability convenience

sampling method Self-administered survey approach The 5 members attempted to hand out 40

surveys each Over sampling ensured that we had needed

number of responses for each gender and class

Methodology cont’d

Assumptions We feel that all respondents answered completely,

truthfully, and accurately. Limitations

The amount of time it took to get freshman and sophomore respondents to answer our survey.

A probability sampling method would have been more desirable as we would have been able to directly choose who we wanted to take our survey.

Lack of interest of the respondents. Some respondents did not fill out the back of the survey.

Methodology cont’d

73.75%

26.25%

Do you consider the inhumane treatment of an-imals when purchasing consumer products (ie:

food, cosmetics, entertainment, medicine, clothing, etc.)?

No

Yes

Question #1

30.62%

69.38%

Are you aware of inhumane treatment of an-imals in the medical industry?

No

Yes

Question #2a

43.75%

56.25%

Are you aware of inhumane treatment of animals in the fashion industry?

No

Yes

Question #2b

32.5%

67.5%

Are you aware of inhumane treatment of animals in the

Cosmetic industry? No

Yes

Question #2c

30.62%

69.38%

Are you aware of inhumane treatment of an-imals in the Food industry?

No

Yes

Question #2d

62.5%

37.5%

Are you aware of inhumane treatment of animals in the entertainment in-

dustry?

No

Yes

Question #2e

72.5%

27.5%

Are you aware of inhumane treatment of animals in the

recreation industry?

No

Yes

Question #2f

75.63%

24.37%

Have you ever been exposed to dog racing?

No

Yes

Question #3a

63.13%

36.87%

Have you ever been exposed to horse racing?

No

Yes

Question #3b

90%

10%

Have you ever been exposed to cock fighting?

No

Yes

Question #3c

87.5%

12.5%

Have you ever been exposed to dog fighting?

No

Yes

Question #3d

64.38%

35.62%

Have you ever been exposed to circus cruelty?

No

Yes

Question #3e

71.9%

27.5%

.6%

If you became aware that an everyday product you use is inhumanely tested on animals would you continue further purchases of this product?

No

Yes

Miss-ing

Question #4

.6%18.1%

19.4%

33.8%

17.5%

10.6%

How important is the humane treatment of animals to you when purchasing con-

sumer products?

Missing

Very Important - 1

2

3

4

Not Important - 5

Mean = 2.81n = 159

Question #5

61.9%

37.5%

.6%

Do you support the experimentation of medical treatment drugs for the use of

humans to be tested on animals for medical advancements?

NoYesMiss-ing

Question #6

13.1%

86.9%

Do you own a pet?

No

Yes

Question #7

94.4%

5% .6%

Choose one of the following that best describes your diet.

CarnivoreVegetar-ianMissing

Question #8

40%

59.4%

.6%

Have you ever heard of factory farming prior to taking this survey?

No

Yes

Missing

Question #9

23.1%

17.5%58.8%

.6%

Do you patronize food businesses that are engaged in factory farming?

NoYesNot SureMissing

Question #10

49.4%50%

.6%

What is your gender?

Female

Male

Missing

Question #11

Question #12

25%

25%24%

25%

1%

What is your class standing?

SeniorJuniorSophomoreFreshmenMissing

88.8%

4.4%1.3% 4.4% .6% .6%

What is your ethnicity?

White

Black or African American

Asian

Hispanic or Latino

Other

Missing

Question #13

16.3%

46.9%

35.6%

1.3%

What type of community do you live in?

UrbanSub-urbanRuralMissing

Question #14

Cross-Tabulations

  What is your gender? Total

Male Female

Do you consider the inhumane

treatment of animals when

purchasing consumer products (ie:

food, cosmetics, entertainment,

medicine, clothing etc.)?

No 64 54 118

Yes 15 26 41

Total 79 80 159

#1: Do you consider the inhumane treatment of animals when purchasing consumer products (ie: food, cosmetics, entertainment, medicine, clothing etc.)? vs. What is your gender?

Cross-Tabulations

#2: If you became aware that an everyday product you use is inhumanely tested on animals would you continue further purchases of this product? vs. Do you own a pet?

  Do you own a pet?

TotalNo Yes

If you became aware that an everyday

product you use is inhumanely tested on

animals would you continue further

purchases of this product?

No 12 103 115

Yes 9 35 44

Total 21 138 159

Cross-Tabulations

  What is your gender? Total

Male Female

Are you aware of inhumane

treatment of animals in the

fashion industry?

No 44 25 69

Yes 35 55 90

Total 79 80 159

  What is your gender? Total

Male Female

Are you aware of inhumane

treatment of animals in the

cosmetics industry?

No 32 20 52

Yes 47 60 107

Total 79 80 159

#3: Are you aware of inhumane treatment of animals in the fashion and cosmetics industries? vs. What is your gender?

The student body shows an overall low awareness level in regards to the inhumane treatment of animals when purchasing consumer products and services. 73.75 % of the students surveyed said that they did not

consider the inhumane treatment of animals when purchasing consumer goods and services.

The student body shows a higher awareness level in regards to the different types of animal cruelty we face today. ex; increased level in awareness of animal cruelty in the

fashion, cosmetic, medical, and food industries.

Discussion

Research objective # 1: Our group accessed literature pertaining to the

related topic of using inhumane practices on animals when developing products and services for consumers. Our group researched and assessed industries in which such practices take place such as biomedical research, fashion, entertainment, cosmetic, and food industries.

Conclusion

Research objective 2- student awareness levels of inhumane treatment of animals: Medical- 69.83 % yes Fashion- 56.25% yes Cosmetics- 67.5% yes Food- 69.38% yes Entertainment- 62.5% no Recreation- 72.5% no Heard of factory farming- 59.4% yes Patronizing factory farming- 58.8 % not sure/ 23.1% no

Conclusion, cont’d

Research objective 3- student opinions and attitudes in regards to the inhumane treatment of animals: Continued purchases- 71.9% no How important- roughly 60 % yes Support medical testing- 61.9% no

Conclusion, cont’d

We recommend that a club rooted around the inhumane treatment of animals should be created on campus.

We also recommend that FPTV take into consideration our own version of an inhumane treatment of animals awareness commercial to be aired on their station. Through these actions, we can hope to not only

increase awareness in the student body, but influence them to consider the inhumane treatment of animals when purchasing consumer products and services.

Recommendations

1. About FDA. (n.d.). The 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WhatWeDo/History/ProductRegulation/ucm132818.htm.

2. Barry, E. (2004, Dec 21). The nation; 7 arrested in hog and dog competitions. Los Angeles Times, pp. 15-A. 15. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/421958302?accountid=37705

3. Biomedical Research | Animal Use in Research. (2012). Biomedical Research | Animal Use in Research. Retrieved from http://www.neavs.org/research/biomedical

4. Bowmar, R. (2009). ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIC RESPONSES TO ANIMAL WELFARE ADVOCACY: A CASE STUDY OF MERINO WOOL AND MULESING (Master's thesis, Michigan State University, 2009). UMI Dissertations

Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.proquest.com5. Dawn, K. (2008). Thanking the monkey: Rethinking the way we treat animals. New York: Harper.6. Hajar, Rachel. "Formats:." National Center for Biotechnology Information. U.S. National Library of Medicine, 01

July 0005. Web. <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3123518/>.7. Hustvedt, G., Peterson, H. H., & Chen, Y. (2008). Labelling wool products for animal welfare and environmental

impact. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 32(5), 427-437. doi: 10.1111/j.1470-6431.2008.00705.x

8. Katrinak, V. (2007). Blinded For Beauty: Rabbits Used In Product Testing. AV Magazine, CXV(1), 2-14.9. Mcleod-Kilmurray, H. (2012). Commoditizing Nonhuman Animals and their Consumers: Industrial Livestock

Production, Animal Welfare, and Ecological Justice. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 72-81. Retrieved October 4, 2012.

10. McNEIL, D. G., J. (2004, Jul 20). KFC supplier accused of animal cruelty. New York Times, pp. 2-C.2. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/432801726?accountid=37705

11. Schaeffer, C. (2010). Product Testing: Beginning to an End? AV Magazine, (2), 4-28.12. Swami, V., Furnham, A., & Christopher, A. N. (2008). Free the animals? Investigating attitudes toward animal

testing in Britain and the United States. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 49(3), 269-276. doi: 10.1111/j.1467- 9450.2008.00636.x

13. Take the Leap to Cruelty-Free Products : LeapingBunny.org. (n.d.). Take the Leap to Cruelty-Free Products : LeapingBunny.org. Retrieved from http://www.leapingbunnypledge.org/pledge.aspx

References