Attitudes, knowledge, and justifications concerning industrially farmed animal welfare between residents of high and low animal agriculture states

Do residents of states with high levels of animal agriculture have different views about animal welfare on industrialized farms compared to residents of states with low levels of animal agriculture? In a survey of residents of high and low farmed animal agriculture states in the USA (N = 1985), we found that views about farmed animal welfare were largely similar between residents of those two sets of states. Using an extreme groups analysis of the 5 highest animal agriculture (e.g., Oklahoma) and 5 lowest animal agriculture states (e.g., Massachusetts), there were no measurable differences on some key outcome variables (e.g., mental state attributions to farmed animals, knowledge of factory farming, killing practices on industrialized farms, state and farmers’ responsibility for farmed animal welfare). Among the variables where we found measurable differences (e.g., those in high animal agriculture states, compared to those in low agriculture states, knew less about animals used as food and had lower estimates of the percent of farmed animals on industrial farms), the size of those differences was small (mean Cohen’s d of variables with significant differences = |0.18|) and none involved a qualitative shift (e.g., from agree to disagree). Moreover, predictors of those views were significant and stable across residents of the two sets of states and consistent with previous research (e.g., knowledge significantly predicted magnitude of factory farming independent of state of residency). These results may help inform where, for what, and by how much differences among residences high and low animal agriculture states matter.