Table 3.

Measures and the questions that comprised them.

	α
Judgement of clients (higher score indicative of more judgmental attitude)	0.85
Pet ownership is a privilege and not a right
People who keep their pets outdoors do not love their pets very much
People commonly use poverty as an excuse for neglecting their pets
Some pet owners are more likely than others to face obstacles when seeking veterinary care for their pets (Reverse scored)
People who surrender their pets to shelters should not be allowed to adopt a pet in the future
People who surrender their pets to shelters lack compassion
If a family is not on any form of public assistance (e.g., Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as Food Stamps), they should be willing and able to pay for the best possible treatment option for their pet
People who surrender their pet to an animal shelter because the pet is sick or injured should not be able to adopt the same pet once treated and recovered
Regard for not-for-profit veterinary clinics (higher score indicative of higher regard, meaning all items were reverse-scored)	0.82
Not-for-profit veterinary practices should be required to qualify their clients by income (i.e., perform means testing)
Not-for-profit veterinary clinics negatively impact revenue for for-profit veterinary clinics that are in the same community
A not-for-profit veterinary clinic should only be allowed to start up in areas where there are currently no for-profit veterinary clinics
Not-for-profit veterinary practices should lose their not-for-profit tax status if they do not qualify their clients by income (i.e., perform means testing)
Effects of pets on health	0.67
Pets can positively impact their owner's health
Pets can reduce owners' stress levels
Pets can impact individuals' physical activity levels
Expectation that veterinarians provide affordable treatment options	0.76
When a client's financial resources are limited, a veterinarian at a for-profit clinic should be willing to provide some care at a level the client can afford rather than providing no care
There are financially sustainable ways in which for-profit veterinary clinics can treat sick pets that belong to low-income clients
There are ethically sound ways in which for-profit veterinary clinics can treat sick pets that belong to low-income clients
Providing access to veterinary care is part of the “social ethic” mandate and therefore the responsibility of those in the veterinary profession
Providing some care at a level the client can afford (i.e., incremental care) can positively impact an animal's quality of life
Confidence in ability to provide incremental care	0.90
To diagnose an animal's medical condition without the use of high-tech equipment
To create effective care plans that utilize alternatives to the best possible treatment options
To present economically disadvantaged clients with alternative, more affordable treatment options when their pets are ill