New Peer-Reviewed Study Finds Widespread Public Support—and Pluralistic Ignorance—Regarding Animal Protection in the United States

A new study published in Human–Animal Interactions and led by researchers from Colorado State University’s Animal-Human Policy Center examines public support for animal protection policies in the United States and reveals a strong pattern of pluralistic ignorance—a systematic tendency for individuals to underestimate how much others support stronger animal welfare protections. The research provides a comprehensive national assessment of both policy attitudes and public misperceptions about social norms surrounding animal protection.

Read the study here: https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/epdf/10.1079/hai.2026.0001

Key Findings

• The study surveyed a nationally representative sample of over 2,000 U.S. adults to measure support for a range of animal protection policies, including farmed-animal welfare standards, bans on particularly harmful carnivore hunting practices, and broader regulatory reforms. Across policies, a majority of respondents expressed support for stronger animal protections at the state and federal level.
• Despite this broad support, respondents consistently underestimated how much other Americans support animal protection, demonstrating pluralistic ignorance. Many participants believed their own pro-animal views were less common than they actually are.
• The pattern of pluralistic ignorance was present for beliefs about the overall importance of animal protection as well the five specific animal protection policies examined: bans on octopus farming, addressing extreme confinement of pigs and chickens, expanding cruelty laws to include wildlife, addressing methods for carnivore hunting, and implementing vessel speed limits for Atlantic right whale conservation.

Why It Matters

The authors highlight that pluralistic ignorance can have important consequences for:

• Policy momentum — When people believe their views are in the minority, they may be less likely to express support publicly or engage in advocacy, even when a true majority exists.
• Legislative decision-making — Policymakers who rely on perceived public opinion rather than accurate data may underestimate voter support for animal protection reforms.
• Social norms — Correcting misperceptions about what “most people” believe can shift conversations and increase openness to policy change.

What This Means for Policy

• The findings suggest a more favorable public climate for animal protection legislation than is commonly assumed. A majority of Americans already support many proposed reforms.
• Norm-correcting communication strategies—messages that accurately convey how widespread public support actually is—may help close the gap between private beliefs and public action.
• Advocacy and policymaking efforts that emphasize broad, bipartisan support for animal welfare could reduce hesitation among voters and elected officials and help translate public attitudes into concrete policy outcomes.