In 1857 British novelist George Eliot wrote, “Animals are such agreeable friends. They ask no questions and they pass no criticism.” So it is no surprise that scholars have long been intrigued by the possibility that animals possess largely untapped therapeutic powers. But are animals good for our psychological and physical health, either as pets or as “therapists”?
Most Americans are animal lovers; about 63 percent of U.S. households contain one or more pets, according to the American Pet Products Manufacturers Association. Several, but not all, studies suggest that those of us who own pets tend to be somewhat happier than those of us who do not. In addition, research by Erika Friedmann and her colleagues at the University of Maryland School of Nursing shows that pet ownership predicts one-year survival rates among victims of heart attacks.
Though interesting and potentially important, studies such as these are difficult to interpret because pet owners may differ in unmeasured ways from people who do not own pets. For example, pet owners may be better adjusted psychologically and have fewer cardiac risk factors (they may eat healthier diets and experience lower levels of hostility) than non–pet owners.
Easing Stress?
To unravel the potential influences of pets on well-being, researchers must conduct experiments that randomly assign some people, but not others, to receive a pet, either in the laboratory or in their home. Studies by psychologists Karen Allen of the University at Buffalo and James Blascovich of the University of California, Santa Barbara, and their colleagues demonstrate that the presence of a favorite pet during a stressful task—such as performing difficult mental arithmetic—largely prevents spikes in participants’ blood pressure. In contrast, the presence of a friend does not. In addition, Allen’s work shows that stressed-out, hypertensive stockbrokers who were randomly assigned to adopt either a pet dog or cat ended up with lower blood pressure than those who were not. These studies suggest that the presence of pets may lower our blood pressure and stress levels, although they do not tell us the reasons for this effect. They also do not inform us whether we would observe similar effects with other preferred stimuli, such as a good luck charm or a favorite doll.
Few would contest the claim that pets can give us comfort, especially in times of strain or loneliness. A far more controversial question concerns the effectiveness of animal-assisted therapy (AAT), defined as the use of an animal as either a treatment by itself or an addition to an existing treatment, such as psychotherapy. The animals used in various forms of AAT are a veritable menagerie: horses, dogs, cats, rabbits, birds, fish, guinea pigs and, perhaps best known of all, dolphins. In turn, the psychological problems for which AATs are used include schizophrenia, clinical depression, anxiety disorders, eating disorders, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism and a host of developmental disabilities.
Popularized largely by Yeshiva University psychologist Boris Levinson in the 1960s, AATs appear to be surprisingly common: a 1973 survey by Oklahoma State University psychologist Susan S. Rice and her colleagues revealed that 21 percent of therapists in the psychotherapy division of the American Psychological Association incorporated animals into their treatment in some fashion. Whether this percentage has changed in 35 years is unknown.
Leisure vs. Therapy
Do AATs work? To make some inroads into this question, we need to distinguish between two different uses of animals: recreation and psychotherapy. Some uses of animals are purely recreational: their goal is to allow their human companions to have fun. There is scant dispute that interacting with friendly animals can “work” for such purposes, because such activities often make people feel happier temporarily. To show that AATs work, however, researchers must demonstrate that animals produce enduring effects on people’s psychological health, not merely short-term changes in mood, such as pleasure, relaxation or excitement.
See what we're tweeting about
6 Comments
Add CommentGood overview of the field.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm no scientist, but I can't forget the story of how my grandfather, Boris M. Levinson, started using animals in his therapy with autistic children. He sometimes brought the family dog, Jingles, to work with him, but he made Jingles stay in a separate room away from patients. One day he was with a child and had to leave momentarily, during which time Jingles made his way through the open door. When my grandpa returned, the child was petting Jingles and thereafter whenever Jingles was in the room the child was able to open up more and communicate better -- via Jingles.
In that instance, Jingles helped. Can animals help in all situations? Probably not. But like most maladies, different therapies work differently with different people.
Thank you,
Danny Levinson
@Danny Levinson,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYour autistic children opened up and communicated better while Jingles was in the room. But did they stay opened up after Jingles left? In other words, did Jingles' presence actually help treat the autism?
It appears nobody knows, which is just the point of the article.
But on second thought, why must the effect be lasting? The effects of Prozac aren't always lasting, because some people become depressed again after they stop taking the drug. A cat can be part of your life for decades. Why can't owning a cat be considered AAT?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFurther, even if the only proven effect of animals is to reduce blood pressure (and presumably, anxiety), why can't that be useful as an adjunct to traditional therapies. It might be very useful to be able to reduce anxiety, even temporarily, so that other theraputic techniques can be applied. I could imagine that having your dog nearby might make it easier for you to talk about traumatic experiences like any abuse or rape, for example. Therapists keep stuffed animals in their offices for exactly that purpose.
I think therapists often confuse "treatment" with "cure". So "treatment" for depression, say, can't include exercise, gardening, etc., i.e., practices that might not address root causes, but still reduce suffering and improve quality of life. Why can't "treatment" include those things? And why can't an animal be part of that?
Animal assisted therapy is assisting other therapies. The animal is used to help with the primary therapy. An example is a child using art therapy, I read an article that the child opened up to the therapist when a dog was brought into the session. The child added the dog into his drawings and then opened up the conversation. People, (not all) feel comfortable around animals, that they aren't being judged or given unwanted advice etc... A bowenian therapist-Cain- used animal therapy and the animal was a bridge between the couple in therapy. This is Bowen's concept, triangles, a 3 rd person or in this case, furry person, helps others to open up. Like medications, animals assist in helping people but aren't the cure. Your example of prozac was, in my opinion, on target. Prozac is a treatment not a cure. Prozac doesn't help everyone either which is the same for assisted animal therapy. It's another option. What we need are more options and if petting a cat is going to help a rape victim work through her fears then I say go with it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOne has also to consider animals as well in this equation. We seem to think only of our own needs. Animals are on the loosing end of this fad, as well as humans, when you think of it, as there is an undeniable link between the way animals are treated and people. This is not a win win situation, at all. Pets are not truly pampered as most people presuppose. Some pets are better treated than others, whatever that means from the animal's perspective, but unless you look at the forest instead of the tree, you are blind to the true nature of pet love, a subtly perverse form of exploitation operating under the cover of good intentions and sentiments. Here are a just a few of the negative effects on animals:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this1) The making of pets - factory farms are just one aspect, countless animals die during production.
2) The legal and illegal trade of exotic pets - countless species are subjected to a ferocious trade.
3) Genetic diseases due to intensive breeding - this represents millions of dollars of veterinary care.
4) Food related diseases - most of pet diseases are from inadequate diet.
5) Anatomical deformities - countless breeds are disfigured for esthetic reasons.
6) Animal psychotherapy, including treatment with various drugs like prozac, is at this moment the most sucessful branch of the pet industry, from a psychological point of view, dependence of this sort is deadly for animals.
7) Physical conditions of captivity – most are inadequate.
8) Surgical mutilations – animals in the raw are very difficult to exploit, they need to be customized for human use by declawing, spaying, tail docking, ear triming, anal gland removal and the like, with the complications that arise from these mutilations.
9) Medical anthropomorphism - the animal medical care fallacy viewed from the animal’s cognitive perspective is another form of abuse. Who are we really pleasing by making animals sick on the one hand and treating them on the other, as if nothing was. How can animals know we mean good!
10) Vaccination mania - annual vaccination is strictly for business reasons, most vaccins on the market are unnecessary if not outright dangerous. None of us humans get vaccinated every year of our lives with 9 sometines 12 vaccins combined.
11) Finally there's the disease of euthanasia, millions pf pets are abandonned and destroyed each year in pounds and what is euphemistically called shelters.
The immorality of making an animal into a pet opens the door to every conceivable type of abuse.
This is really interesting. I have heard of <a href="http://www.sojo.ca">psychologists in Edmonton</a> using animals for therapy, but I thought dogs were used more than cats. I know a lot of people who have cats, and they all say that they find them very calming and therapeutic. Thanks for the article!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this