Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35840600›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Investigation of humans individual differences as predictors of their animal interaction styles, focused on the domestic cat.

Lauren R Finka, Lucia Ripari, Lindsey Quinlan, Camilla Haywood, Jo Puzzo, Amelia Jordan, Jaclyn Tsui, Rachel Foreman-Worsley, Laura Dixon, Marnie L Brennan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Lauren R FinkaBattersea Dogs and Cats Home, Battersea, London, UK. lauren.finka@ntu.ac.uk.
Lucia RipariAnimal, Rural and Environmental Sciences, Nottingham Trent University, Brackenhurst Campus, Southwell, UK.
Lindsey QuinlanBattersea Dogs and Cats Home, Battersea, London, UK.
Camilla HaywoodBattersea Dogs and Cats Home, Battersea, London, UK.
Jo PuzzoBattersea Dogs and Cats Home, Battersea, London, UK.
Amelia JordanJeanne Marchig International Centre for Animal Welfare Education, Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Midlothian, UK.
Jaclyn TsuiBattersea Dogs and Cats Home, Battersea, London, UK.
Rachel Foreman-WorsleyAnimal, Rural and Environmental Sciences, Nottingham Trent University, Brackenhurst Campus, Southwell, UK.
Laura DixonAnimal Behaviour and Welfare, SRUC, Midlothian, UK.
Marnie L BrennanCentre for Evidence-Based Veterinary Medicine, University of Nottingham, Sutton Bonington Campus, Loughborough, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humans' individual differences including their demographics, personality, attitudes and experiences are often associated with important outcomes for the animals they interact with. This is pertinent to companion animals such as cats and dogs, given their social and emotional importance to humans and degree of integration into human society. However, the mechanistic underpinnings and causal relationships that characterise links between human individual differences and companion animal behaviour and wellbeing are not well understood. In this exploratory investigation, we firstly quantified the underlying structure of, and variation in, human's styles of behaviour during typical human-cat interactions (HCI), focusing on aspects of handling and interaction known to be preferred by cats (i.e. 'best practice'), and their variation. We then explored the potential significance of various human individual differences as predictors of these HCI styles. Seven separate HCI styles were identified via Principal Component Analysis (PCA) from averaged observations for 119 participants, interacting with sociable domestic cats within a rehoming context. Using General Linear Models (GLMs) and an Information Theoretic (IT) approach, we found these HCI PC components were weakly to strongly predicted by factors including cat-ownership history, participant personality (measured via the Big Five Inventory, or BFI), age, work experience with animals and participants' subjective ratings of their cat behaviour knowledge. Paradoxically, greater cat ownership experiences and self-assessed cat knowledge were not positively associated with 'best practice' styles of HCI, but were instead generally predictive of HCI styles known to be less preferred by cats, as was greater participant age and Neuroticism. These findings have important implications regarding the quality of human-companion animal relationships and dyadic compatibility, in addition to the role of educational interventions and their targeting for optimal efficacy. In the context of animal adoption, these results strengthen the (limited) evidence base for decision making associated with cat-adopter screening and matching. In particular, our results suggest that greater cat ownership experiences and self-reports of cat knowledge might not necessarily convey advantages for cats in the context of HCI.

Indexed as

IndividualityOwnershipAnimalsBehavior, AnimalCatsDogsEmotionsHumansPersonality

Identifiers

PMID35840600
PMCPMC9287547

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.