ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026
How University Students Evaluate the Use of Laboratory Animals: The Role of Species and Individual Differences.
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of animals in biomedical research and university teaching remains socially sensitive, shaped by ethical concerns, regulations, and public expectations. While animal models are still essential for basic and translational research, society increasingly demands transparency, strong welfare protections, and the development of alternative methods. This study investigated Spanish university students' attitudes toward the use of animals in basic research, translational research, and educational settings, and examined their acceptance of different species for addressing human health problems. It also assessed how sociodemographic variables, personality traits, empathy, and anthropomorphism relate to these views. The sample included 653 students, predominantly women, heterosexual, and urban residents. Most participants supported the use of animals in research, whereas opinions regarding teaching uses were more divided. Attitudes toward the use of laboratory animals consistently differed by gender and field of study, with men and students in science-related disciplines showing higher acceptance. Of the psychological variables assessed, only anthropomorphism showed moderate negative correlations with support for the use of laboratory animals across all contexts. Species strongly influenced attitudes: companion animals generated the most opposition, primates and livestock elicited mixed responses, and rodents, invertebrates, and aquatic species received the highest support. Overall, students generally accept animal use but vary substantially by species, gender, and academic background.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.