Psychology of recreational hunting: Why we need to speak differently

Motives, violence, empathy and what studies show about hobby hunters. The discussion about the societal role of recreational hunting is often reduced to ecology, wildlife damage and tradition. However, it is rarely questioned what psychological and social patterns lie behind the voluntary recreational activity of killing.

Wild beim Wild Editorial Team — 6 January 2026

Why do people kill animals not out of necessity, but as a recreational activity?

Recreational hunting is often justified by tradition, nature conservation or regulation. But psychological research shows a different picture. Studies on motivation, empathy and violence suggest that recreational hunting poses not only ecological but also societal risks. It is time to discuss the psychology of recreational hunting openly, scientifically and critically.

Available research, particularly the dissertation «Psychological-sociological differences between hobby hunters and non-hunters» by Ursula Grohs, suggests that there are significant differences in attitudes and perceptions that have barely been scientifically investigated further to this day.

This is precisely where a problem begins: The data situation is thin, but the indications are explosive. Important: No diagnoses can be derived from individual studies. However, they show which questions are scientifically overdue.

Grohs found that hobby hunters rate themselves as significantly more aggressive than non-hunters, more frequently resolve conflicts through dominance and control, and have a different relationship to violence. Although this work is methodical, it remains one of the few systematic investigations in the German-speaking area, and it has not been replicated for years. A scientific gap of this magnitude is difficult to comprehend given the societal risk of legally armed private individuals.

Dark Triad traits and recreational hunting

Studies on so-called 'Dark Triad' traits examine connections between personality dimensions, empathy, and attitudes toward animals. Individual findings suggest that higher expressions of certain traits may correlate with lower animal-relatedness and higher acceptance of animal suffering.

A study on 'Dark Triad' personality traits (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy) found that individuals with higher scores in these traits have less positive attitudes toward animals and are more likely to commit animal cruelty. From a psychological perspective, hobby hunters could have more similarities with individuals who display dark personality aspects, e.g., lower empathy, need for power, pleasure in killing.

Currently, the debate about hunting-related violence is mainly conducted through individual cases: neighborhood dramas, domestic violence, hunting accidents, mistaken shots at joggers, mountain bikers, or children. These incidents are real, documented, and recurring, but they do not replace empirical analysis. Precisely because they exist thousandfold, this analysis is exactly what is needed. Instead, hunting associations invoke tradition, custom, and a supposedly homogeneous 'fair chase' ethic, without presenting reliable data on the actual personality profiles and risk indicators of their members.

Recreational hunting as social ritual and violence normalization

Independent of moral positions on animal ethics, it is clear: The voluntary decision to kill animals for recreational motives and even pay for it is not a neutral act. It presupposes a certain handling of empathy, power, and control. The claim that this handling should be identical on average to that of non-hunters is an assertion without scientific foundation. At the same time, psychological models have suggested for decades that repeated, pleasure- or thrill-based killing of animals can influence aggression processing, sensation seeking, and distancing mechanisms. Violence and lies belong to the same coin.

We should have an interest in promoting independent, modern research: representative samples, valid personality measures, clear differentiation between subsistence, professional, and recreational hunting, and analysis of real behavioral data. As long as this research is missing, recreational hunting remains a societal blind spot, with weapons, animals, humans, and many senseless victims at the center.

Why the debate is politically and socially relevant

An enlightened debate about recreational hunting must be more than the repetition of old justifications. It must illuminate the psychological prerequisites, risks, and effects of a hobby based on killing sentient beings. Without this honesty, the discussion remains incomplete and the responsibility that comes with every bullet is underestimated.

Frequently asked questions about the psychology of recreational hunting

Why do people hunt from a psychological perspective?
Studies show that motives such as control, status, tradition and acceptance of violence can play a role.

Is recreational hunting problematic from a psychological perspective?
That depends on the context. However, research points to risks such as desensitization and normalization of violence.

Is there a connection between recreational hunting and empathy?
Several studies suggest that regular acts of killing can influence empathy.

Are recreational hunters psychopaths?
Psychopathy is a clinical diagnosis and cannot be attributed to groups across the board. The focus is on motives, risk factors and research gaps.

More on this in the dossier: Psychology of Hunting

Related Articles