Does Anthropomorphism of Dogs Affect Pain Perception in Animal-Assisted Interventions? An Exploratory Study

The purpose of this exploratory study was to determine the effects of anthropomorphism of a therapy dog on pain perception during an animal-assisted intervention. Participants were 32 college women who were randomly assigned to the anthropomorphism condition or the control condition. All participants engaged in a pretest cold pressor task to measure base-line individual differences in pain tolerance and perceptions of pain intensity and pain unpleasantness. After completing this task, participants in the anthropomorphism group engaged in a task intended to prime them to view a therapy dog anthropomorphically. Specifically, they rated photos of dogs on a series of humanlike traits (e.g., “this dog would be a good listener”). Participants in the control condition rated photos of dogs on a series of canine traits (e.g., “this dog would make a good watchdog”). After this experimental manipulation, participants engaged in a second cold pressor task in the presence of a therapy dog and the therapy dog handler. We hypothesized that participants in the anthropomorphism group would demonstrate greater pain tolerance and report lower levels of pain intensity and pain unpleasantness during the second cold pressor task than participants in the control group. Results provide partial support for these hypotheses. Participants in the anthropomorphism group reported lower posttest pain intensity than participants in the control group. In addition, they demonstrated greater posttest pain tolerance than participants in the control group—but only under conditions of medium or high pretest pain tolerance. The two groups did not differ with respect to posttest pain unpleasantness. The results of this exploratory study provide preliminary evidence that prompting individuals to view a therapy dog anthropomorphically may augment their experience of pain relief from a therapy dog visit.     

Thinking about Cats or Dogs Provides Relief from Social Rejection

Past research shows that anthropomorphizing animals and nonhuman objects is correlated with unmet social needs (e.g., loneliness), and momentary feelings of social rejection can be soothed by thinking about a pet or by having a dog nearby. The current work tested whether thinking of names for cats and dogs improves wellbeing after social rejection, as well as whether this phenomenon occurs because of a unique quality of animals or because of anthropomorphism more generally. In three studies, participants relived a past experience of social rejection, social acceptance, or a physical injury (a control condition), after which they reported their current wellbeing. Next, participants named either cats or dogs (studies 1, 2, 3), people (study 2), or plastic toys (study 3) before reporting their current wellbeing for a second time. Across all three studies, naming cats or dogs reduced feelings of social rejection. Naming anthropomorphic plastic toys, however, produced a similar effect. To test the role of anthropomorphism in this phenomenon, study 3 also measured participants’ chronic tendency to anthropomorphize and included a condition in which participants only viewed animals or toys. Rejected participants who simply viewed photos of cats or dogs (without naming them) experienced improved wellbeing if they were already dispositionally inclined to engage in anthropomorphism. Collectively, these results suggest that briefly thinking about cats or dogs is an effective strategy for improving feelings of social rejection and that general processes involving anthropomorphism can produce this ameliorative effect.     

A view from the bridge: Subjectivity,embodiment and animal minds

Abstract

In contemporary discussions of animal mind the difficulty of studying the nature of private, subjective awareness in animals is often seen as a barrier to a fuller understanding of animal experience. Relatively little work has focused on more recent psychological accounts of mind that emphasize its extended, embodied and social aspects. We examine some of the main conceptual difficulties in this area, and then consider a number of more embodied approaches. We suggest that a consideration of the nature of the animal-human relationship is crucial to a consideration of animal awareness.     

Creative Ignorance

To secure the public trust, risk analysts should divorce themselves from the philosophy of probabilism and the language of probability. Given the antecedent conditions, the chance of an outcome is either one or zero. Values between one and zero must be based on something other than the conditions and are misleading. Probabilism holds that the same conditions produce varying outcomes and assigns fractional probabilities to each of the outcomes. Probabilists conclude this by ignoring the differences between the antecedent conditions. When probabilists do not know if an outcome can or cannot occur, they conclude that it can. As epidemiologists seldom, if ever, know the particular conditions, they conclude that individuals within large populations are at risk to the same degree. Indeed, the less they know about us as individuals, the more at risk the public becomes. Not knowing the conditions, probabilists base their calculations on their ignorance of the conditions. Using one and zero equivocally, philosopher mathematicians tailored the language of probability to the philosophy of probabilism. With it, they convinced players who, given the conditions, cannot win that they could. Epidemiologists employ it to convince persons who, given the conditions, are not at risk that they are.     

Does Human–Animal Similarity Lower the Need to Affirm Humans’ Superiority Relative to Animals? A Social Psychological Viewpoint

This research integrates different social psychological theories to test whether human–animal similarity promotes affiliation with animals and lowers the need to affirm humans’ superiority relative to animals. On the basis of theories of intergroup relations, terror management theory, and work conducted in the field of human–animal relations, we expected that higher human–animal similarity would decrease the need to affirm humans’ superiority relative to animals, by triggering a greater sense of shared social identity. Two correlational studies (ns = 187 and 191) tested a mediation model whereby perceived human–animal similarity was expected to predict a lower need to differentiate the perceived status of humans from animals through a process of social identification with animals. Mediated regressions provided support for these associations. A repeated-measures experiment (n = 176) replicated these findings by systematically comparing objectively (phylogenetically) more vs. less similar animals and assessing perceived status and identification. Results are discussed in light of theories of intergroup relations, terror management theory, as well as recent advances in the field of social psychology and self and identity processes.     

The Anthropomorphic Application of Gender Stereotypes to Horses

ABSTRACT

Gender stereotypes shape human social interaction, often to the detriment of women and those who do not comply with normative expectations of gender. So far, little research has assessed the extent to which people apply gender stereotypes to animals, and the implications this may have for in-dividuals and groups, particularly female animals. The current study investigated survey respondents’ preference for horses to perform in different sport and leisure practices, based solely on ideas about the sex of the animal. An anonymous online survey explored the preferences of riders for mares, geldings, and stallions for dressage, show-jumping, and trail-riding, and reasons for their choice. A total of 1,032 responses were received. Geldings were the preferred choice, being perceived as safe and reliable, followed by stallions who were valued for their supposed power, presence, and good looks. Overall, mares were the least popular choice, and were discussed in ambivalent terms reflecting broad gender stereotypes which depict females as moody, flighty, and unpredictable. Respondents appeared to draw on gender stereotypes to make judgements about horses and justify their choices. The anthropomorphic application of gender stereotypes to animals may have negative consequences for female animals, shaping human–animal interactions and expectations.