People experience cognitive dissonance when they entertain 2 conflicting ideas at the same time. Cognitive dissonance may cause a negative emotional state, which can lead to engagement of compensation mechanisms to resolve the conflict. Here we describe a survey that explores cognitive
dissonance in laboratory animal veterinarians and veterinary technicians and various ways in which veterinary staff manage dissonance associated with research animal use. Respondents—164 veterinarians and 145 veterinary technicians—were asked to rate their opinions of various statements
on a sliding scale of 'strongly disagree' to 'strongly agree' or 'never' to 'always.' Statements assessed negative emotions (discomfort, powerlessness, frustration) and compensation mechanisms (devaluing, emotional distancing, shifting responsibility) as bases for inferring effects on welfare
states of animals. Responses were evaluated overall and were compared according to level of training (veterinarian compared with veterinary technician), years of work experience (0 to 5, 6 to 10, greater than 10), and species tended (large, mixed, small species). Respondents strongly agreed
that animal wellbeing and animal use in research were important. Respondents reported feelings of discomfort, powerlessness, and frustration associated with work. In addition, respondents reported feeling empowered to initiate changes affecting animal welfare. The most frequent compensation
mechanism noted was shifting responsibility onto the IACUC and institutional rules. Devaluing the animals was another reported compensation mechanism. Responses to emotional distancing statements were divided. Survey responses supported the existence of cognitive dissonance associated with
laboratory animal medicine. Potential negative and positive effects on animal welfare are discussed.
Modification of empirical antimicrobial regimens in large animal medicine
