Empathy for others’ pain guides moral concern and prosocial behaviour, yet how it extends across species remains to be elucidated. This study examined how people perceive and respond to pain in humans and animals, and how these responses relate to psychosocial traits. We developed and validated the Cross-Species Pain Empathy Task (C-SPET), the first tool to compare perceived pain and prosocial intentions toward humans, pets, and farmed animals under pain and no-pain conditions. 407 undergraduate participants completed the C-SPET and psychosocial questionnaires. Participants showed greater willingness to help animals than humans, possibly due to perceived vulnerability. Within animals, farmed animals were perceived as suffering more and received more support than pets when no pain was visible. This may reflect inferred suffering based on knowledge of farmed animals’ living conditions. When pain was explicit, pets were seen as suffering more and received more support. Pain cues may trigger closeness to pets or cognitive dissonance to farmed animal suffering. Canonical correlation analyses identified psychosocial profiles linked to C-SPET responses. A caring, pro-animal profile was associated with greater support for animals. A profile marked by emotional reactivity and cultural factors was linked to greater pain sensitivity. Empathic biases were shaped by distinct traits. Favouring animals over humans was associated with pro-animal attitudes and lower prejudice. Favouring pets over farmed animals was linked to ethnicity, higher meat consumption, conservatism, and social dominance, suggesting a tendency to maintain traditional roles around animal categories. The results highlight the psychosocial factors that shape pain empathy across species.
Suñol et al. (2026) studied this question.