Exploring the differences between pet and non-pet owners: Implications for human-animal interaction research and policy.

There is conflicting evidence about whether living with pets results in better mental and physical health outcomes, with the majority of the empirical research evidence being inconclusive due to methodological limitations. We briefly review the research evidence, including the hypothesized mechanism...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jessica Saunders, Layla Parast, Susan H Babey, Jeremy V Miles
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2017-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5482437?pdf=render
id doaj-71cbea3c07514095903763687fde3f5c
record_format Article
spelling doaj-71cbea3c07514095903763687fde3f5c2020-11-24T20:45:05ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032017-01-01126e017949410.1371/journal.pone.0179494Exploring the differences between pet and non-pet owners: Implications for human-animal interaction research and policy.Jessica SaundersLayla ParastSusan H BabeyJeremy V MilesThere is conflicting evidence about whether living with pets results in better mental and physical health outcomes, with the majority of the empirical research evidence being inconclusive due to methodological limitations. We briefly review the research evidence, including the hypothesized mechanisms through which pet ownership may influence health outcomes. This study examines how pet and non-pet owners differ across a variety of socio-demographic and health measures, which has implications for the proper interpretation of a large number of correlational studies that attempt to draw causal attributions. We use a large, population-based survey from California administered in 2003 (n = 42,044) and find that pet owners and non-pet owners differ across many traits, including gender, age, race/ethnicity, living arrangements, and income. We include a discussion about how the factors associated with the selection into the pet ownership group are related to a range of mental and physical health outcomes. Finally, we provide guidance on how to properly model the effects of pet ownership on health to accurately estimate this relationship in the general population.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5482437?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Jessica Saunders
Layla Parast
Susan H Babey
Jeremy V Miles
spellingShingle Jessica Saunders
Layla Parast
Susan H Babey
Jeremy V Miles
Exploring the differences between pet and non-pet owners: Implications for human-animal interaction research and policy.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Jessica Saunders
Layla Parast
Susan H Babey
Jeremy V Miles
author_sort Jessica Saunders
title Exploring the differences between pet and non-pet owners: Implications for human-animal interaction research and policy.
title_short Exploring the differences between pet and non-pet owners: Implications for human-animal interaction research and policy.
title_full Exploring the differences between pet and non-pet owners: Implications for human-animal interaction research and policy.
title_fullStr Exploring the differences between pet and non-pet owners: Implications for human-animal interaction research and policy.
title_full_unstemmed Exploring the differences between pet and non-pet owners: Implications for human-animal interaction research and policy.
title_sort exploring the differences between pet and non-pet owners: implications for human-animal interaction research and policy.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2017-01-01
description There is conflicting evidence about whether living with pets results in better mental and physical health outcomes, with the majority of the empirical research evidence being inconclusive due to methodological limitations. We briefly review the research evidence, including the hypothesized mechanisms through which pet ownership may influence health outcomes. This study examines how pet and non-pet owners differ across a variety of socio-demographic and health measures, which has implications for the proper interpretation of a large number of correlational studies that attempt to draw causal attributions. We use a large, population-based survey from California administered in 2003 (n = 42,044) and find that pet owners and non-pet owners differ across many traits, including gender, age, race/ethnicity, living arrangements, and income. We include a discussion about how the factors associated with the selection into the pet ownership group are related to a range of mental and physical health outcomes. Finally, we provide guidance on how to properly model the effects of pet ownership on health to accurately estimate this relationship in the general population.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5482437?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT jessicasaunders exploringthedifferencesbetweenpetandnonpetownersimplicationsforhumananimalinteractionresearchandpolicy
AT laylaparast exploringthedifferencesbetweenpetandnonpetownersimplicationsforhumananimalinteractionresearchandpolicy
AT susanhbabey exploringthedifferencesbetweenpetandnonpetownersimplicationsforhumananimalinteractionresearchandpolicy
AT jeremyvmiles exploringthedifferencesbetweenpetandnonpetownersimplicationsforhumananimalinteractionresearchandpolicy
_version_ 1716815542310928384