Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2017 Jun 23;12(6):e0179494.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0179494. eCollection 2017.

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

Jessica Saunders  1 , Layla Parast  1 , Susan H Babey  2 , Jeremy V Miles  1
Affiliations
Review

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

Jessica Saunders et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: None of the authors have relevant financial disclosures to make. Working for the RAND Corporation, a non-profit public policy research institution, does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and material.

References

    1. Shepherd AJ. Results of the 2006 AVMA survey of companion animal ownership in US pet-owning households. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. 2008;232(5):695–6. doi: 10.2460/javma.232.5.695 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Olmert MD. Made for each other: The biology of the human-animal bond: Da Capo Press; 2009.
    1. Herzog H. The Impact of Pets on Human Health and Psychological Well-Being Fact, Fiction, or Hypothesis? Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2011;20(4):236–9.
    1. Gershman KA, Sacks JJ, Wright JC. Which Dogs Bite—a Case-Control Study of Risk-Factors. Pediatrics. 1994;93(6):913–7. - PubMed
    1. Kaye AE, Belz JM, Kirschner RE, editors. Pediatric Dog Bite Injuries: A 5-Year Review of the Experience at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. 76th Annual Conference of the American-Society-of-Plastic-Surgeons; 2007 Oct 29–30; Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.