IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/4gbhe.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cat owners’ perceptions towards feline microchipping

Author

Listed:
  • Page, Tara
  • Lewis, Todd R

    (UWE Bristol)

  • Read, Lee

Abstract

Compulsory feline microchipping has become a legal requirement in 2021 for domestic cats (Felis catus) in the UK, following the introduction of compulsory microchipping for dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) in 2016. The concept of compulsory feline microchipping attracts a combination of perceptions from the public, both positive and negative. An online survey was designed to obtain cat owners’ perception toward feline microchipping, evaluating attitudes and knowledge, and offering an opportunity for participants to provide insights into their reasoning for, or against, microchipping. Findings suggested that demographics are key predictors for influencing cat owners’ perception toward feline microchipping. In particular, men are less likely to formulate opinions regarding feline welfare and microchipping, and concern for feline welfare and empathy toward cats increases with age across both men and women. When asked to provide more details about their decision to microchip, or not microchip, the survey responses revealed 66% agent-centred reasoning compared to 24% welfare, suggesting that regardless of a person’s decision, reasoning was respectively agent-centred. This suggests that potential human benefits may influence cat owners’ perception toward feline microchipping. 75% of participants support compulsory microchipping. Of those who would not support the legislation, feline welfare concerns, and a negative outlook surrounding the current database and scanning processes that support microchipping, was revealed. A focus on addressing negative perceptions toward feline microchipping could highlight approaches to change cat owners’ perceptions toward the technique positively. The results herein are useful for feline welfare organisations to promote understanding about feline microchipping.

Suggested Citation

  • Page, Tara & Lewis, Todd R & Read, Lee, 2021. "Cat owners’ perceptions towards feline microchipping," OSF Preprints 4gbhe, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:4gbhe
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/4gbhe
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6147af01585ec2041af35048/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/4gbhe?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wickham, Hadley, 2007. "Reshaping Data with the reshape Package," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 21(i12).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Augustinus, Benno A. & Blum, Moshe & Citterio, Sandra & Gentili, Rodolfo & Helman, David & Nestel, David & Schaffner, Urs & Müller-Schärer, Heinz & Lensky, Itamar M., 2022. "Ground-truthing predictions of a demographic model driven by land surface temperatures with a weed biocontrol cage experiment," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 466(C).
    2. Miller, Christine M.F. & Waterhouse, Hannah & Harter, Thomas & Fadel, James G. & Meyer, Deanne, 2020. "Quantifying the uncertainty in nitrogen application and groundwater nitrate leaching in manure based cropping systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    3. Sean McKenzie & Hilary Parkinson & Jane Mangold & Mary Burrows & Selena Ahmed & Fabian Menalled, 2018. "Perceptions, Experiences, and Priorities Supporting Agroecosystem Management Decisions Differ among Agricultural Producers, Consultants, and Researchers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, November.
    4. C. J. Torrecilla-Salinas & O. Troyer & M. J. Escalona & M. Mejías, 2019. "A Delphi-based expert judgment method applied to the validation of a mature Agile framework for Web development projects," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 9-40, March.
    5. Priyanga Dilini Talagala & Rob J Hyndman & Kate Smith-Miles & Sevvandi Kandanaarachchi & Mario A Munoz, 2018. "Anomaly detection in streaming nonstationary temporal data," Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers 4/18, Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics.
    6. Thelma Dede Baddoo & Zhijia Li & Yiqing Guan & Kenneth Rodolphe Chabi Boni & Isaac Kwesi Nooni, 2020. "Data-Driven Modeling and the Influence of Objective Function Selection on Model Performance in Limited Data Regions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-26, June.
    7. Paul J McMurdie & Susan Holmes, 2014. "Waste Not, Want Not: Why Rarefying Microbiome Data Is Inadmissible," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-12, April.
    8. Priscila Villalobos Perna & Mirko Di Febbraro & Maria Laura Carranza & Flavio Marzialetti & Michele Innangi, 2023. "Remote Sensing and Invasive Plants in Coastal Ecosystems: What We Know So Far and Future Prospects," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, January.
    9. Bikram K. Das & Robiul Islam Rubel & Surbhi Gupta & Yajun Wu & Lin Wei & Volker S. Brözel, 2022. "Impacts of Biochar-Based Controlled-Release Nitrogen Fertilizers on Soil Prokaryotic and Fungal Communities," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-15, October.
    10. Stefan LINGNER & Eiko THIESSEN & Kerrin MÜLLER & Eberhard HARTUNG, 2018. "Dry Biomass Estimation of Hedge Banks: Allometric Equation vs. Structure from Motion via Unmanned Aerial Vehicle," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 64(4), pages 149-156.
    11. França, Lucas Gabriel Souza & Montoya, Pedro & Miranda, José Garcia Vivas, 2019. "On multifractals: A non-linear study of actigraphy data," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 514(C), pages 612-619.
    12. Wenjun Chen & Jordan S. Brown & Tao He & Wei-Sheng Wu & Shikui Tu & Zhiping Weng & Donglei Zhang & Heng-Chi Lee, 2022. "GLH/VASA helicases promote germ granule formation to ensure the fidelity of piRNA-mediated transcriptome surveillance," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, December.
    13. Lisa Biber‐Freudenberger & Candan Ergeneman & Jan Janosch Förster & Thomas Dietz & Jan Börner, 2020. "Bioeconomy futures: Expectation patterns of scientists and practitioners on the sustainability of bio‐based transformation," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(5), pages 1220-1235, September.
    14. Cornelius J. König & Clemens B. Fell & Linus Kellnhofer & Gabriel Schui, 2015. "Are there gender differences among researchers from industrial/organizational psychology?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1931-1952, December.
    15. Neeraj Dhanraj Bokde & Zaher Mundher Yaseen & Gorm Bruun Andersen, 2020. "ForecastTB—An R Package as a Test-Bench for Time Series Forecasting—Application of Wind Speed and Solar Radiation Modeling," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-24, May.
    16. Martín, Belén & Páez, Antonio, 2019. "Individual and geographic variations in the propensity to travel by active modes in Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 103-113.
    17. Lorilla, Roxanne Suzette & Kalogirou, Stamatis & Poirazidis, Konstantinos & Kefalas, George, 2019. "Identifying spatial mismatches between the supply and demand of ecosystem services to achieve a sustainable management regime in the Ionian Islands (Western Greece)," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    18. Shannon P McPherron, 2018. "Additional statistical and graphical methods for analyzing site formation processes using artifact orientations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, January.
    19. Mads Albertsen & Søren M Karst & Anja S Ziegler & Rasmus H Kirkegaard & Per H Nielsen, 2015. "Back to Basics – The Influence of DNA Extraction and Primer Choice on Phylogenetic Analysis of Activated Sludge Communities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-15, July.
    20. Behm, Svenia & Haupt, Harry, 2020. "Predictability of hourly nitrogen dioxide concentration," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 428(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:4gbhe. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.