Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40002947›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2025

The Public Perception of Zoophilic Acts in Hungary.

Szilvia Vetter, Beáta Szilassi, László Ózsvári

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Szilvia VetterCentre for Animal Welfare, University of Veterinary Medicine Budapest, 1078 Budapest, Hungary.
Beáta SzilassiCentre for Animal Welfare, University of Veterinary Medicine Budapest, 1078 Budapest, Hungary.
László ÓzsváriDepartment of Veterinary Forensics and Economics, University of Veterinary Medicine Budapest, 1078 Budapest, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0002-5568-7319

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to assess public perceptions and knowledge of, and attitudes towards, zoophilia in Hungary. Conducted between October and December 2021 with 1753 respondents, the survey revealed significant interest and concern regarding zoophilia. The majority (98.3%) of respondents deemed zoophilia to be unacceptable from both health and animal welfare perspectives. Of those surveyed, 98.9% believed that animals possess dignity, and 84.7% felt that zoophilia negatively impacts this dignity. However, awareness of Hungarian legislation on zoophilia was limited, with 38.9% of respondents unaware that such acts are legally prohibited. The survey also highlighted a strong consensus (98.2%) favoring strict penalties for zoophilia. Additionally, the survey uncovered that 14% of respondents had encountered or heard of zoophilic incidents, involving various animals, predominantly dogs. Gender and settlement type significantly influence attitudes toward zoophilic acts, with women and people in capital and major cities being more aware of the legal prohibition and more supportive of strict sanctions. The results underscore a crucial need for enhanced public education on legal standards and ethical considerations regarding zoophilia and suggest a significant gap in understanding and managing the issue, necessitating further research and legislative reforms.

Indexed as

animal crueltyanimal welfarepenal sanctioningzoophile actszoophilia

Identifiers

PMID40002947
PMCPMC11851403

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.