Theoretical and Methodological Approaches to Forensic Ethics Examination of Information Materials in Animal Cruelty Cases

The article opens a series of works devoted to developing a set of diagnostic features of information materials related to forensic ethics examination in animal cruelty cases. The expert methodology aimed at identifying such a set of diagnostic features must be based on objective scientific approaches. This first article of the series addresses the issue of whether there exists an objective and empirically verified structure of values. It examines the stages of empirical axiology development, beginning with the first standardized questionnaire by G. Allport and P. Vernon, continuing with the Harvard project of the general theory of social action by T. Parsons, the M. Rokeach methodology and observations of R. Inglehart and concluding with a large-scale cross-cultural study by S. Schwartz. Each of these stages provided the forensic ethics examination with a distinct scientific basis, from the measurability of values to the universality of their structure. The article shows that the ten basic value types and the circular structure of relations among them have been confirmed by measurements in hundreds of sample data from dozens of countries which forms a universal model capable of serving as an objective framework for the expert ethical assessment of the information materials submitted for examination. The universal model describes the organization of the value system but does not assign the highest priority in the value hierarchy to the values of the social focus. For the Russian society this priority is established by the system of traditional spiritual and moral values enshrined in the Decree No. 809 of the President of the Russian Federation. The joint operation of Schwartz universal model and the normative priorities of the system of traditional spiritual and moral values in expert analysis is ensured by the dual methodological loop, the application of which is briefly shown using the case related to the activities of the Good Vet veterinary clinic examined earlier. It is further planned to consider in detail the correlation of traditional Russian values with the universal model and the dual-loop method as well as to present the set of diagnostic features itself.

1. Volchenko D.S. Application of Specialized Forensic Ethics Knowledge in Cases Involving Animal Cruelty. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2026. Vol. 21. No. 1. P. 100–115. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2026-1-100-115

2. Starkina M. They’ll Just Buy a New Doggy”: What the Moscow Veterinary Clinic Faces after the Death of a Pomeranian. Moskva24. 04.12.2025. (In Russ.). https://www.m24.ru/articles/proisshestviya/04122025/852962

3. Khaziev Sh.N. Dictionary of Forensic Ethics Examination. Moscow: Shlyakhov RFCFS, 2025. 147 p. (In Russ.).

4. Schwartz S.H. The Refined Theory of Basic Values / Ed. by S. Roccas, L. Sagiv // Values and Behavior: Taking a Cross-Cultural Perspective. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017. P. 51–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56352-7_3

5. Alkhasov A.A. Max Scheler on Hierarchy of Values. Historical, Philosophical, Political and Law Sciences, Culturology and Art History. Issues of Theory and Practice. 2015. No. 5 (55). Part II. P. 13–15. (In Russ.).

6. Inglehart R., Baker W.E. Modernization, Cultural Change, and the Persistence of Traditional Values // American Sociological Review. 2000. Vol. 65. No. 1. P. 19–51. https://doi.org/10.2307/2657288

7. Zapko-Willmes A., Schwartz S.H., Richter J., Kandler C. Basic Value Orientations and Moral Foundations: Convergent or Discriminant Constructs? // Journal of Research in Personality. 2021. Vol. 95. 104099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2021.104099

8. Parsons T., Shils E.A. Values, Motives, and Systems of Action / T. Parsons, E.A. Shils (ed.) // Toward a General Theory of Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1951. P. 45–275. https://archive.org/details/towardgeneralthe00pars

9. Spates J.L. The Sociology of Values // Annual Review of Sociology. 1983. Vol. 9. P. 27–49. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.09.080183.000331

10. Oles P.K., Hermans H.J.M. Allport-Vernon. Study of Values. In: Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences / V. Zeigler-Hill, T.K. Shackelford (ed.). Cham: Springer, 2020. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319608825_Allport-Vernon_Study_of_Values

11. Kopelman R.E., Rovenpor J.L., Guan M. The Study of Values: Construction of the Fourth Edition // Journal of Vocational Behavior. 2003. Vol. 62. No. 2. P. 203–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00047-7

12. Spranger E. Types of Men: The Psychology and Ethics of Personality. Halle: Max Niemeyer, 1928. https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.122134

13. Trubitsyna, L.V., Knyazyatov, D.I. Adaptation of the Value Orientation Questionnaire by G. Allport for a Russian-Speaking Sample. Psychology and Psychotechnics. 2025. No. 4. P. 133–151. (In Russ.).

14. Parsons T., Shils E.A. (Eds.). Toward a General Theory of Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1951. 506 p. https://archive.org/details/towardgeneralthe00pars

15. Parsons T., Shils E.A. et al. Some Fundamental Categories of the Theory of Action: A General Statement // Toward a General Theory of Action / Ed. by T. Parsons, E.A. Shils. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1951. P. 3–29.

16. Kluckhohn C. Values and Value-Orientations in the Theory of Action: An Exploration in Definition and Classification / T. Parsons, E.A. Shils (ed.) // Toward a General Theory of Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1951. P. 388–433.

17. Powers W.R. The Harvard Study of Values: Mirror for Postwar Anthropology // Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences. 2000. Vol. 36. No. 1. P. 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6696(200024)36:1<15::AID-JHBS2>3.0.CO;2-I

18. Parsons T. The Social System. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press, 1951.

19. Inglehart R. The Silent Revolution in Europe: Intergenerational Change in Post-Industrial Societies // American Political Science Review. 1971. Vol. 65. No. 4. P. 991–1017. https://doi.org/10.2307/1953494

20. Böltken F., Jagodzinski W. In an Environment of Insecurity: Postmaterialism in the European Community, 1970–1980 // Comparative Political Studies. 1985. Vol. 17. No. 4. P. 453–484. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414085017004003

21. Clarke H.D., Dutt N. Measuring Value Change in Western Industrialized Societies: The Impact of Unemployment // American Political Science Review. 1991. Vol. 85. No. 3. P. 905–920. https://doi.org/10.2307/1963855

22. Clarke H.D., Dutt N., Rapkin J. Conversations in Context: The (Mis)Measurement of Value Change in Advanced Industrial Societies // Political Behavior. 1997. Vol. 19. No. 1. P. 19–40. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024893622007

23. Inglehart R., Abramson P.R. Measuring Postmaterialism // American Political Science Review. 1999. Vol. 93. No. 3. P. 665–677. https://doi.org/10.2307/2585581

24. Manfredo M.J., Bruskotter J.T., Teel T.L., Fulton D., Schwartz S.H., Arlinghaus R., Oishi S., Uskul A.K., Redford K., Kitayama S., Sullivan L. Why Social Values Cannot Be Changed for the Sake of Conservation // Conservation Biology. 2017. Vol. 31. No. 4. P. 772–780. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12855

25. Inglehart R. Post-Materialism in an Environment of Insecurity // American Political Science Review. 1981. Vol. 75. No. 4. P. 880–900. https://doi.org/10.2307/1962290

26. Sortheix F.M., Parker P.D., Lechner C.M., Schwartz S.H. Changes in Young Europeans’ Values during the Global Financial Crisis // Social Psychological and Personality Science. 2019. Vol. 10. No. 1. P. 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617732610

27. Rokeach M. The Nature of Human Values. New York: Free Press, 1973. 456 p.

28. Schwartz S.H. Universals in the Content and Structure of Values: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests in 20 Countries // Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 1992. Vol. 25. P. 1–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6

29. Lechner C.M., Beierlein C., Davidov E., Schwartz S.H. Measuring the Four Higher-Order Values in Schwartz’s Theory: Validation of a 17-Item Inventory // Journal of Personality Assessment. 2024. Vol. 106. No. 5. P. 651–664. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2024.2311193.

30. Schwartz S.H., Bilsky W. Toward a Universal Psychological Structure of Human Values // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1987. Vol. 53. No. 3. P. 550–562.

31. Schwartz S.H. An Overview of the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values // Online Readings in Psychology and Culture. 2012. Vol. 2. Iss. 1. 11. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1116

32. Schwartz S.H., Huismans S. Value Priorities and Religiosity in Four Western Religions // Social Psychology Quarterly. 1995. Vol. 58. No. 2. P. 88–107. https://doi.org/10.2307/2787148

33. Schwartz S., Butenko T.P., Sedova D.S., Lipatova A.S. A Refined Theory of Basic Personal Values: Validation in Russia. Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics. 2012. Vol. 9. No. 2. P. 43–70. (In Russ.).

34. Schwartz S.H. A Proposal for Measuring Value Orientations across Nations // Questionnaire Development Report of the European Social Survey. 2003. Chapter 7. P. 6–7.

35. Onodera Yu. A Muscovite Filed a Lawsuit against a Veterinary Clinic Whose Staff Laughed at Her Dog’s Death. Afisha Daily. 05.12.2025. (In Russ.). https://daily.afisha.ru/news/104592-moskvichka-podala-v-sud-na-vetkliniku-rabotniki-kotoroy-smeyalis-nad-smertyu-ee-sobaki/