Intervention Research
Below, we introduce a few of the most common interventions and highlight some important research questions. We think these are questions that currently lack answers supported by robust evidence and, if answered, would allow animal advocates to have a much greater impact. This list is not exhaustive of the proposals we are willing to consider. We are open to proposals that produce strong evidence about any intervention that has the potential to help many animals.
Books and documentaries
Books and documentaries are used to raise awareness about animal use and suffering, and inspire individuals to reduce their meat consumption. There is some correlational evidence that suggests a large proportion people who have become vegetarian or vegan did so after reading a book or watching a documentary (Humane League Labs, 2014), but it is unclear whether a strong causal relationship exists here (e.g. Hormes, Rozin, Green & Fincher, 2013). We would thus invite proposals that produce strong evidence about the impact of animal advocacy books and documentaries on individual behavior. For example, a randomized controlled trial investigating the dietary choices of a group who is shown a documentary versus a group who is not.
Corporate Outreach
The term corporate outreach is used to refer to an intervention where individuals or organizations work with restaurant chains, supermarkets, and other businesses to strengthen a variety of animal welfare policies. These include cage-free-egg campaigns but also campaigns against gestation crates and other particularly cruel practices, as well as campaigns to increase the availability of vegetarian and vegan food options and/or reduce meat offerings. Some campaigns are conducted privately between organization representatives and decision-makers, while others involve petitions and public pressure tactics. For a review of this intervention, see the Animal Charity Evaluators website.
Corporate outreach is a complex intervention to evaluate because it aims to influence both institutional and individual behavior. It is relatively easy for us to observe at least the short-term impact of corporate outreach on institutional behaviors (i.e. public commitments to policy change). However, we do not yet have strong evidence about the medium- or long-term impacts of corporate outreach on institutional behavior (i.e. actual policy change). We would thus invite proposals that produce strong evidence about the medium- or long-term impacts of corporate outreach on institutional behavior. For example, a statistical analysis that estimates the causal effects of corporate outreach campaigns on medium- or long-term policy outcomes.
We also do not have strong evidence about how individual consumers respond to corporate outreach campaigns and related policy changes. On the one hand, these campaigns provide an opportunity to raise awareness about animal welfare and food production issues. On the other hand, policy changes that increase the availability of humane alternatives (e.g. cage-free eggs) may enable consumers who could have otherwise become vegetarian or vegan to feel comfortable continuing to eat meat. We would thus invite proposals that produce strong evidence about the impact of corporate outreach campaigns and related policy changes on individual consumer behavior. For example, experiments that present people with news stories about different corporate outreach outcomes, or a statistical analysis that estimates the causal effects of corporate outreach campaigns on medium- or long-term market outcomes.
Humane Education
The term humane education is used to refer to an intervention where speakers visit high school, college, or other classes and give advocacy presentations. For a review of this intervention, see the Animal Charity Evaluators website. We are aware of one study that has examined the impact of a humane education intervention (Animal Charity Evaluators, 2013), but the evidence produced by this study was limited. We would thus invite proposals that produce strong evidence about the overall impact of humane education on individual behavior. For example, a randomized controlled trial investigating the dietary choices of a group who is given a humane education presentation versus a group who is not. We would also be open to considering proposals that produce evidence about the impact of specific factors such as presentation format (e.g. group activity vs. lecture), though these proposals will likely be a lower funding priority.
Investigations
The term investigation is used to refer to an intervention where individuals or organizations obtain documentation (e.g. photos and videos) of the treatment of animals, often without the explicit cooperation of the people or organizations using the animals. For a review of this intervention, see the Animal Charity Evaluators website.
Like corporate outreach, investigations are a complex intervention to evaluate because they aim to influence both institutional and individual behavior. It is relatively easy for us to observe at least the short-term impact of investigations on institutional behavior (i.e. public commitments to policy change). However, we do not yet have strong evidence about the medium- or long-term impacts of investigations on institutional behavior (i.e. actual policy change). We would thus be open to considering proposals that produce strong evidence about the medium- or long-term impacts of investigations on institutional behavior. For example, a statistical analysis that estimates the causal effects of investigations on medium- or long-term policy outcomes.
We also do not have strong evidence about how individual consumers respond to investigation campaigns. We would thus invite proposals that produce strong evidence about the impact of investigation campaigns on individual consumer behavior. For example, experiments that present people with news stories about different investigations, or a statistical analysis that estimates the causal effects of investigations on medium- or long-term market outcomes. We would also be open to considering proposals that produce evidence about the impact of specific factors such as investigation type (i.e. undercover vs. open rescue), or investigation framing (e.g. one bad worker/company vs. standard industry practice) on individual behavior, though these proposals will likely be a lower funding priority.
Leafleting
Leafleting is an intervention where individuals or organizations distribute advocacy literature on sidewalks and college campuses, usually to encourage people to reduce or eliminate their consumption of animal products. See Animal Charity Evaluators’ website for a review of this intervention. For a review of this intervention, see the Animal Charity Evaluators website. To our knowledge, there have been four studies that examined the impact of leafleting (Animal Charity Evaluators, 2013a; Humane League Labs, 2014; Farm Sanctuary, 2013a, 2013b; Vegan Outreach, 2014), though we think there is still room for high-quality research on this intervention (see Hurford, 2014). We invite proposals that produce strong evidence about the overall impact of leafleting on individual behavior. For example, a randomized controlled trial investigating the dietary choices of a group who is given an advocacy leaflet versus a group who is not. We would also be open to proposals that produce evidence about the impact of specific factors such as the content or length of the leaflets, though these types of proposals will likely be a lower funding priority.
Online Ads
The term online ads is used to refer to an intervention where organizations post ads on Facebook or other online outlets, usually showing users an advocacy message that links to a landing page showing a video or other advocacy content. For a review of this intervention, see the Animal Charity Evaluators website. To our knowledge, there have been two studies that examined the impact of online ads (The Humane League, 2011; Mercy For Animals, 2016), though the evidence produced by these studies has been limited (see Hurford, 2016). We would thus invite proposals that produce strong evidence about the overall impact of online ads on individual behavior. For example, a randomized controlled trial investigating the dietary choices of a group who is shown an online ad versus a group who is not. We would also be open to proposals that produce evidence about the impact of specific factors such as the content of the ads or landing page, though these proposals will likely be a lower funding priority.
Pay-Per-View
The term pay-per-view is used to refer to an intervention where individuals or organizations bring video equipment to areas with heavy foot traffic and pay passers-by small amounts of money to watch brief advocacy videos, usually suggesting that they reduce or eliminate their consumption of animal products and offering them an email sign-up. We are aware of one study that has examined the impact of a pay-per-view intervention (Farm Animal Rights Movement, 2013), but we think there is still room for high-quality research on this intervention. We would thus invite proposals that produce strong evidence about the overall impact of pay-per-view (or other non-incentivized forms of video outreach) on individual behavior. We would also be open to considering proposals that produce evidence about the impact of specific factors such as payment amount or video medium (e.g. 2D vs. Virtual Reality), though these proposals will likely be a lower funding priority.
Pledges
Pledges are commitments made by individuals or institutions (e.g. school districts or hospitals) to reduce their consumption of animal products (e.g. Veganuary). We are aware of one study that examined the impact of pledges (Faunalytics, 2016), but we think there is still room for high-quality research on this intervention. We would thus invite proposals that produce strong evidence about the overall impact of pledges on individual behavior. We would also be open to considering proposals that produce evidence about the impact of specific factors such as type of commitment (e.g. Vegan Before 6pm vs. Meatless Mondays) or initial length of commitment (e.g. indefinitely vs. 3 months), though these proposals will likely be a lower funding priority.
Protests
The term protest is used to refer to an intervention where individuals or organizations air grievances in a public space, and can range from a few individuals holding signs to mass marches and other coordinated actions.
Like corporate outreach and investigations, protests are a complex intervention to evaluate because they aim to influence both institutional and individual behavior. It is relatively easy for us to observe at least the short-term impact of protests on institutional behavior (i.e. public commitments to policy change). However, we do not yet have strong evidence about the medium- or long-term impacts of protests on institutional behavior. We would thus invite proposals that produce strong evidence about the medium- or long-term impacts of protests on institutional behavior (i.e. actual policy change). For example, a statistical analysis that estimates the causal effects of protests on medium- or long-term policy outcomes.
We also do not have strong evidence about how individual consumers respond to protests on individual behavior. We would thus invite proposals that produce strong evidence about the overall impact of protests on individual behavior. For example, a statistical analysis that estimates the causal effects of protests campaigns on medium- or long-term market outcomes. We would also be open to considering proposals that produce evidence about the impact of specific factors such as protest target (i.e. standard company vs. progressive company), or protest type (e.g. disruption vs. rally) on individual behavior, though these proposals will likely be be a lower funding priority.
Support programs
The term support program is used to refer to interventions that help individuals transition toward or sustain a vegetarian or vegan diet. For example, Vegetarian Starter Guides, Vegan Mentorship Programs, and Veg Fests. We are aware of some research that has examined the impact of Veg Fests (Compassionate Action for Animals, 2015; Mad City Vegan Fest, 2014, 2015, 2016), but we think there is still room for high-quality research in this area. We would thus invite proposals that produce strong evidence about the overall impact of support programs on individual behavior.
Other interventions
The preceding list is not exhaustive of the interventions we would consider. We are open to considering proposals that produce strong evidence about any interventions that have the potential to help many animals. Examples of other interventions might include legal interventions (e.g. Nonhuman Rights Project, Animal Justice), interventions to increase the availability and popularity of plant-based alternatives and/or cultured meat (e.g. Good Food Institute, New Harvest, Plant Based Foods Association, VegFund), social media and other forms of online outreach, and mass advertising campaigns (e.g. billboards, TV ads), to name a few.
Foundational Research
While not our immediate priority, the Animal Advocacy Research Fund is also willing to consider supporting basic research that contributes to a theoretical understanding of topics relevant to animal advocacy. For example, proposals that advance a basic understanding of what motivates people to reduce their consumption of animal products and/or take action on behalf of animals.
There are a number of variables that we think might be relevant to understanding these behaviors, including but not limited to moral or ethical convictions about animal protection, environmental protection, and/or spiritual purity; beliefs about the health benefits of a plant-based diet; the trajectory and magnitude of any attempted dietary changes (e.g. immediate vs. gradual, small vs. big); cognitive (e.g. perspective-taking, attributions) and emotional (e.g. guilt, shame, sympathy, anger) reactions to animal suffering; visceral reactions to consuming animal products (e.g. enjoyment, disgust); beliefs about farmed animals (e.g. sentience, intelligence, capability of suffering); carnist beliefs and other system-justifying ideologies; prejudice towards and stereotypes about vegans and vegetarians, as well as prevention strategies (e.g. intergroup contact); self-perception and identity processes (e.g. self-perception theory, vegan identification, activist identification); beliefs about the potential for social change (e.g. perceptions of the legitimacy and stability of the status quo); reactions to different actions that seek to challenge the status quo (e.g. normative vs. non-normative protests); individual differences (e.g. political ideology, personality traits); and demographic characteristics (e.g. gender, age, income).
Although our priority is intervention research, we would also consider proposals that produce strong evidence about the role and relative importance of these and other theoretical variables, the nature of any relevant underlying mechanisms, and the specific factors that moderate their effects. There are several correlational and experimental studies that have helped to begin answering some of these foundational questions, but we think there is still room for more high-quality research. For reviews of this literature, see Amiot & Bastian, 2015; Bastian & Loughnan, 2016; Cooney, 2013; Font-i-Furnols & Guerrero, 2014; Joy, 2010; Loughnan, Bastian, & Haslam, 2014; Plous, 1993; Rozin, 1996; Ruby, 2012; Taft, 2016; and Zaraska, 2016.