IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2021i1p193-d710804.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Family Member, Best Friend, Child or ‘Just’ a Pet, Owners’ Relationship Perceptions and Consequences for Their Cats

Author

Listed:
  • Esther M. C. Bouma

    (Department of Social Psychology, University of Groningen, 9712 TS Groningen, The Netherlands)

  • Marsha L. Reijgwart

    (EthoPet, 6815 HG Arnhem, The Netherlands)

  • Arie Dijkstra

    (Department of Social Psychology, University of Groningen, 9712 TS Groningen, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Describing the relationship with one’s cat in human terms might reflect an underlying anthropomorphic view of the relationship which might be associated with an owner’s behavior towards their cat and the cat’s living environment. Owners self-categorized the relationship with their cat as either a ‘member of the family’, ‘as a child’, ‘best friend’, or ‘a pet animal’. The extent to which owner- and cat-related factors influence these four relationship descriptions are examined in survey data of approximately 1800 cat owners. Differences in outdoor access, care during absence of the owner, and access to the bedroom are examined between the four relationship perceptions. The owner’s age and household composition, ideas about their cat’s equality, support, and dependency, and whether their cat is a pedigree were significantly associated with relationship description and explained 46% of the variance. Owners who perceive their cat as a child or best friend see their cat as loyal, empathetic, equal to family, and dependent on them for love and care. Their cats are less often left in the care of others, are allowed more often in the bedroom and have less often (unrestricted) outdoor access. Moreover, cats perceived as children are more likely to live in a multi-cat household. Our results provide insight in the factors that are related to different (anthropomorphic) perceptions of the human–cat relationship and how perceptions relate to the living environment of cats.

Suggested Citation

  • Esther M. C. Bouma & Marsha L. Reijgwart & Arie Dijkstra, 2021. "Family Member, Best Friend, Child or ‘Just’ a Pet, Owners’ Relationship Perceptions and Consequences for Their Cats," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-18, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2021:i:1:p:193-:d:710804
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/1/193/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/1/193/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wood, Lisa & Giles-Corti, Billie & Bulsara, Max, 2005. "The pet connection: Pets as a conduit for social capital?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(6), pages 1159-1173, September.
    2. Endenburg, N. & Hart, H. 't & Bouw, J., 1994. "Motives for acquiring companion animals," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 191-206, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Isabel Silva & Glória Jólluskin & Estela Vilhena & Allison Byrne, 2022. "Adaptation of the Pet Bereavement Questionnaire for European Portuguese Speakers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-13, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Clément Meier & Jürgen Maurer, 2022. "Buddy or burden? Patterns, perceptions, and experiences of pet ownership among older adults in Switzerland," European Journal of Ageing, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 1201-1212, December.
    2. Headey, Bruce & Grabka, Markus M., 2007. "Pets and Human Health in Germany and Australia: National Longitudinal Results," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 80, pages 297-311.
    3. Coate Stephen & Knight Brian, 2010. "Pet Overpopulation: An Economic Analysis," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-59, December.
    4. Karynna Okabe-Miyamoto & Dunigan Folk & Sonja Lyubomirsky & Elizabeth W Dunn, 2021. "Changes in social connection during COVID-19 social distancing: It’s not (household) size that matters, it’s who you’re with," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(1), pages 1-16, January.
    5. Eloise C.J. Carr & Jean E. Wallace & Rianne Pater & Douglas P. Gross, 2019. "Evaluating the Relationship between Well-Being and Living with a Dog for People with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Feasibility Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-16, April.
    6. Gregg K. Takashima & Michael J. Day, 2014. "Setting the One Health Agenda and the Human–Companion Animal Bond," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-11, October.
    7. Zhenguo Lin & Marcus Allen & Charles Carter, 2013. "Pet Policy and Housing Prices: Evidence from the Condominium Market," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 109-122, July.
    8. Jaroslav Flegr & Marek Preiss, 2019. "Friends with malefit. The effects of keeping dogs and cats, sustaining animal-related injuries and Toxoplasma infection on health and quality of life," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-30, November.
    9. Bruce Headey & Fu Na & Richard Zheng, 2008. "Pet Dogs Benefit Owners’ Health: A ‘Natural Experiment’ in China," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 87(3), pages 481-493, July.
    10. Paloma Morales-Flores & Carlos Marmolejo-Duarte, 2021. "Can We Build Walkable Environments to Support Social Capital? Towards a Spatial Understanding of Social Capital; a Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-15, November.
    11. Ida Marie Henriksen & Aksel Tjora, 2014. "Interaction Pretext: Experiences of Community in the Urban Neighbourhood," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(10), pages 2111-2124, August.
    12. Rebecca Utz, 2014. "Walking the Dog: The Effect of Pet Ownership on Human Health and Health Behaviors," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 116(2), pages 327-339, April.
    13. Matsumura, Kenta & Hamazaki, Kei & Tsuchida, Akiko & Inadera, Hidekuni, 2022. "Pet ownership during pregnancy and mothers' mental health conditions up to 1 year postpartum: A nationwide birth cohort—the Japan Environment and Children's Study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 309(C).
    14. Brown, Tim & Bell, Morag, 2007. "Off the couch and on the move: Global public health and the medicalisation of nature," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(6), pages 1343-1354, March.
    15. Zhen Guo & Xiaoxing Ren & Jinzhe Zhao & Liying Jiao & Yan Xu, 2021. "Can Pets Replace Children? The Interaction Effect of Pet Attachment and Subjective Socioeconomic Status on Fertility Intention," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-12, August.
    16. Mohammad Javad Koohsari & Akitomo Yasunaga & Ai Shibata & Kaori Ishii & Rina Miyawaki & Kuniko Araki & Tomoki Nakaya & Tomoya Hanibuchi & Gavin R. McCormack & Koichiro Oka, 2021. "Dog ownership, dog walking, and social capital," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-6, December.
    17. Rock, Melanie & Mykhalovskiy, Eric & Schlich, Thomas, 2007. "People, other animals and health knowledges: Towards a research agenda," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(9), pages 1970-1976, May.
    18. Kent, Jennifer L. & Mulley, Corinne, 2017. "Riding with dogs in cars: What can it teach us about transport practices and policy?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 278-287.
    19. Ana Junça-Silva, 2022. "Unleashing the Furr-Recovery Method: Interacting with Pets in Teleworking Replenishes the Self’s Regulatory Resources: Evidence from a Daily-Diary Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-14, December.
    20. Eriksson, Malin & Dahlblom, Kjerstin, 2020. "Children's perspectives on health-promoting living environments: The significance of social capital," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2021:i:1:p:193-:d:710804. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.