Impact of a Frame Reflection Assignment on Veterinary Student Perspectives toward Animal Welfare and Differing Viewpoints

Abstract

Veterinarians are considered leaders in animal welfare, but veterinary curricula often lack training in welfare. Our aims were to describe veterinary student values, assess whether a frame reflection assignment can encourage student willingness to engage with others with differing values surrounding animal welfare, and determine if sex and career area of emphasis related to responses. Two cohorts of second-year veterinary students at the Ohio State University ( n = 314) articulated their values (including those of biological functioning, affective states or natural living they value most), interviewed someone with differing values, reported their interviewee’s views as if they were their own (frame reflection), then reflected on the process (post-interview reflection). Qualitative and quantitative analyses were used. Students identified as 83% female and 17% male, a with small animal (56%), large animal (11%), mixed animal (15%), or other (19%) career areas of emphasis. Students valued affective states (45%) and biological functioning (42%) more than natural living (11%). Food animal students were more likely to value biological functioning. In their post-interview reflections, students articulated both productive and unproductive views (e.g., likely or unlikely to improve future conversations, respectively), though productive views were more common. Students reported that the assignment would benefit their careers by improving their communication strategies with clients. Female students were more likely to use themes related to unproductive and career-related views. We conclude that a frame reflection assignment is a novel and effective method for improving veterinary student communication skills when discussing controversial animal welfare topics.