Animal Cruelty :: Psychology, Conduct Disorder

For one to completely understand animal cruelty one must know how animal cruelty is categorized. Animal cruelty was first categorized as a symptom of conduct disorder by the American Psychiatric Association in 1987 (McPhedran; 2008). Conduct disorder is defined as â€Å"a repetitive and persistent pattern of behavior in which the basic rights of others are major age appropriate societal norms or rules are violated† (American Psychiatric Association; 1994 as cited as McPhedran; 2008). To be diagnosed with conduct disorder, a person must have at least 3 of the 15 symptoms of the disorder presented. Other symptoms of conduct disorder include persistent patterns of aggression towards humans, lying and deception, theft and/or robbery, and destruction of property (American Psychiatric Association; 1994 as cited as McPhedran; 2008). There is variety of studies that shows that their factors that influence people’s judgments about cruelty. Attitudes about abuse and neglect can be reliably differentiated among both men and women; women tend to more empathic towards the animals that were abused; men and women differ with the regard to the structure of their attitude (Henry; 2008). The attitude about animal abuse differ between women and men is because men reflect a lower level of empathy than women, and that can result in men judging acts of violence differently (Pakaslanhti & Keltikanga- Jarvinen; 1997 as cited as Henry; 2008). Research has found that women have a stronger and broader moral strictures against aggression than men do (Perry, Perry & Rasmussen; 1986 as cited as Henry; 2008). Women appear to have a broader scope of what constitutes cruelty than men. When it comes to punishing people for abusing animals’ research showed that women recommended harsher punishments for acts of animal abuse than men and that recommended punishments were harsher when the victim was a puppy compared to when the victim was a chicken (Henry; 2008). When it comes to be mind set of describing animal abuse the type of animals was similar and it depended on the type of animal that was victimized for them to consider it was animal cruelty (Henry; 2008). A person mood at the moment of being questioned about punishment for animal cruelty depended if they wanted punishment are not. Results indicated that participants in a positive mood-state recommended harsher punishments for animal cruelty for the perpetrator of the abuse (Henry; 2008). People also recommended harsher punishment when the animal-victim was perceived as being more similar to humans (Henry; 2008). Animal Cruelty :: Psychology, Conduct Disorder For one to completely understand animal cruelty one must know how animal cruelty is categorized. Animal cruelty was first categorized as a symptom of conduct disorder by the American Psychiatric Association in 1987 (McPhedran; 2008). Conduct disorder is defined as â€Å"a repetitive and persistent pattern of behavior in which the basic rights of others are major age appropriate societal norms or rules are violated† (American Psychiatric Association; 1994 as cited as McPhedran; 2008). To be diagnosed with conduct disorder, a person must have at least 3 of the 15 symptoms of the disorder presented. Other symptoms of conduct disorder include persistent patterns of aggression towards humans, lying and deception, theft and/or robbery, and destruction of property (American Psychiatric Association; 1994 as cited as McPhedran; 2008). There is variety of studies that shows that their factors that influence people’s judgments about cruelty. Attitudes about abuse and neglect can be reliably differentiated among both men and women; women tend to more empathic towards the animals that were abused; men and women differ with the regard to the structure of their attitude (Henry; 2008). The attitude about animal abuse differ between women and men is because men reflect a lower level of empathy than women, and that can result in men judging acts of violence differently (Pakaslanhti & Keltikanga- Jarvinen; 1997 as cited as Henry; 2008). Research has found that women have a stronger and broader moral strictures against aggression than men do (Perry, Perry & Rasmussen; 1986 as cited as Henry; 2008). Women appear to have a broader scope of what constitutes cruelty than men. When it comes to punishing people for abusing animals’ research showed that women recommended harsher punishments for acts of animal abuse than men and that recommended punishments were harsher when the victim was a puppy compared to when the victim was a chicken (Henry; 2008). When it comes to be mind set of describing animal abuse the type of animals was similar and it depended on the type of animal that was victimized for them to consider it was animal cruelty (Henry; 2008). A person mood at the moment of being questioned about punishment for animal cruelty depended if they wanted punishment are not. Results indicated that participants in a positive mood-state recommended harsher punishments for animal cruelty for the perpetrator of the abuse (Henry; 2008). People also recommended harsher punishment when the animal-victim was perceived as being more similar to humans (Henry; 2008).