APA 6th Edition Cifrić, I. (2005). Antropocentrična i biocentrična odgovornost za život. Socijalna ekologija, 14 (3), 195-215. Preuzeto s https://hrcak.srce.hr/9102
MLA 8th Edition Cifrić, Ivan. "Antropocentrična i biocentrična odgovornost za život." Socijalna ekologija, vol. 14, br. 3, 2005, str. 195-215. https://hrcak.srce.hr/9102. Citirano 13.07.2020.
Chicago 17th Edition Cifrić, Ivan. "Antropocentrična i biocentrična odgovornost za život." Socijalna ekologija 14, br. 3 (2005): 195-215. https://hrcak.srce.hr/9102
Harvard Cifrić, I. (2005). 'Antropocentrična i biocentrična odgovornost za život', Socijalna ekologija, 14(3), str. 195-215. Preuzeto s: https://hrcak.srce.hr/9102 (Datum pristupa: 13.07.2020.)
Vancouver Cifrić I. Antropocentrična i biocentrična odgovornost za život. Socijalna ekologija [Internet]. 2005 [pristupljeno 13.07.2020.];14(3):195-215. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/9102
IEEE I. Cifrić, "Antropocentrična i biocentrična odgovornost za život", Socijalna ekologija, vol.14, br. 3, str. 195-215, 2005. [Online]. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/9102. [Citirano: 13.07.2020.]
Sažetak The author starts from the hypothesis on the existence of two ways of comprehending the responsibility for life: 'only for the human life' and 'for the whole life'. They are the consequence of evaluating life and the pre-supposition of moral action. An opinion pol has been carried out (April 2005) at five faculties of the University of Zagreb, on the occasional sample of 492 respondents from the first and final year of study. Instruments for discerning diferent bioethical issues that are associated with the responsibility of humans for life have been designed. Techniques of univariant, bivariant and multivariant statistics have been applied. The majority of respondents (74%-84%) do not accept assertions on the human responsibility only for his/her life or only for the life of humans, for the life of human race and human species, and for the life of animal that are beneficial to humans. On the contrary, the majority of respondents accept the responsibility for al life, even the one that is only conceived but not yet born. On the instrument of ‘responsibility for life’ the factor analysis has established two independent factors: ‘responsibility only for human life’ – anthropocentric responsibility (F1) and ‘responsibility for al life’ – biocentric responsibility (F2), that explain 56.42% of the variance. Independency of the factors (F1 and F2) confirm the existence of two groups of respondents and also confirm the existence of two concepts of responsibility for life: anthropocentric and biocentric, that indicate the basis for two bioethic orientations: anthropocentric and biocentric ethics. ‘Responsibility only for human life’ is significantly more accepted by male/female students at the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture, of the male sex, and the ‘responsibility for al life’ is more accepted by male/female students at the Theological Faculty, those of the ‘right-leaning’ political orientation and those of female sex.