Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40867472›Full record

ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Exploring Interaction Dynamics in Dog-Assisted Therapy: An Observational Study.

Candela Jasmin Hüsgen, Nienke Peters-Scheffer, Robert Didden

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Candela Jasmin HüsgenBehavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, P.O. Box 9104, 6500 HE Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3822-925X
Nienke Peters-SchefferBehavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, P.O. Box 9104, 6500 HE Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4832-0241
Robert DiddenBehavioural Science Institute, Radboud University, P.O. Box 9104, 6500 HE Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Funding

Stichting Hulphond Nederland
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

(1) Background: Dog-assisted therapy (DAT) integrates dogs into therapeutic sessions to enhance participants' physical, emotional, and social well-being. Despite its growing popularity, little is known about the interaction dynamics between the dog, participant, and therapist during sessions. (2) Methods: This study examined these dynamics, focusing on active participation, focus direction, joint focus, and physical contact. Video data from sessions 1, 5, and 9 of 10 individual therapy sessions with five participants were analysed using behavioural observations and an ethogram. (3) Results: Results indicated that therapists' active participation increased over time while participants' activity levels remained stable. Dogs were most active during the initial and final sessions. Participants' focus on therapists remained consistent, but their focus on the dog stabilised after an initial decline. Dogs are primarily focused on their surroundings. The joint focus between participants and therapists increased, and physical contact with dogs varied significantly among participants and dogs. (4) Conclusions: The findings partially support the "icebreaker" theory, whereby dogs help establish initial rapport. However, the trend was not consistent across all participants. Therapist-dog interactions remained low and stable. Differences in dog characteristics (e.g., breed and fur type) and participant needs may explain variation in physical contact. These findings underline the complexity of DAT and highlight the need for further research into interaction patterns relate to participants and dog characteristics.

Indexed as

animal assisted therapybehavioural observationdog-assisted therapy (DAT)dog behaviourhuman–animal interaction

Identifiers

PMID40867472
PMCPMC12383071

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.