Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41933181›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Pawsitive impact: exploring associations between pet keeping and connection to nature.

Matthias Winfried Kleespies, Sebastian Schneider, Julia Delic, Lena Fauerbach, Vanessa Hama-Ali, Fiona Jennifer Herrmann, Isabel Kaiser, Melina Kurzawe, Elena Maria Mathes, Hannah Sandra Neuschwander and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Matthias Winfried KleespiesDepartment of Bioscience Education and Zoo Biology, Goethe University, Max-von-Laue-Straße 13, 60438, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. kleespies@em.uni-frankfurt.de.
Sebastian SchneiderDepartment of Bioscience Education and Zoo Biology, Goethe University, Max-von-Laue-Straße 13, 60438, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Julia DelicDepartment of Bioscience Education and Zoo Biology, Goethe University, Max-von-Laue-Straße 13, 60438, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Lena FauerbachDepartment of Bioscience Education and Zoo Biology, Goethe University, Max-von-Laue-Straße 13, 60438, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Vanessa Hama-AliDepartment of Bioscience Education and Zoo Biology, Goethe University, Max-von-Laue-Straße 13, 60438, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Fiona Jennifer HerrmannDepartment of Bioscience Education and Zoo Biology, Goethe University, Max-von-Laue-Straße 13, 60438, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Isabel KaiserDepartment of Bioscience Education and Zoo Biology, Goethe University, Max-von-Laue-Straße 13, 60438, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Melina KurzaweDepartment of Bioscience Education and Zoo Biology, Goethe University, Max-von-Laue-Straße 13, 60438, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Elena Maria MathesDepartment of Bioscience Education and Zoo Biology, Goethe University, Max-von-Laue-Straße 13, 60438, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Hannah Sandra NeuschwanderDepartment of Bioscience Education and Zoo Biology, Goethe University, Max-von-Laue-Straße 13, 60438, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Paul Wilhelm DierkesDepartment of Bioscience Education and Zoo Biology, Goethe University, Max-von-Laue-Straße 13, 60438, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

People spend less time in nature, contributing to a decline in connection with nature. Pets or companion animals play a prominent role in many people’s lives, yet quantitative empirical evidence on the relationship between pet keeping and connection to nature remains limited. This study therefore surveyed 2548 participants in Germany to examine associations between keeping a dog, cat, horse, other mammal, bird, fish, or terrarium animal and respondents’ connection to nature. A multiple linear regression model including seven pet types and the covariates age, gender, and place of residence was estimated. In this model, keeping a dog, cat, or horse as well as age, gender, and place of residence were associated with connection to nature. To further examine the role of the three covariates, three separate follow-up models testing moderation by age, gender, and place of residence were conducted. While cat and horse keeping were positive in the initial model, these associations may be attributable to age (cats) and gender (horses), whereas dog keeping showed the most consistent positive association across models. These results provide valuable insights into the associations between pet keeping and connection to nature, particularly highlighting that dog keeping is positively associated with higher levels of connection to nature. Given the observational nature of the data, no conclusions about causality or directionality can be drawn. Further research, ideally using longitudinal or experimental designs, is needed to clarify these associations and explore implications for environmental education and conservation strategies.

Indexed as

PetsAdultAgedAnimalsCatsDogsFemaleGermanyHorsesHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultBiophiliaCompanion animalNature connectednessNature relatednessRuralUrban

Identifiers

PMID41933181
PMCPMC13049069

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.