TY - JOUR
T1 - Identification of dysfunctional human–dog dyads through dog ownership histories
AU - Canejo-Teixeira, Rute
AU - Neto, Isabel
AU - Baptista, Luís V.
AU - Niza, Maria Manuela Rodeia Espada
N1 - info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/FCT/5876/147304/PT#
UID/SOC/04647/2019
PY - 2019/1/1
Y1 - 2019/1/1
N2 - The human–dog relationship is at least 16,000-years old and is mutually beneficial to both dyadic members. When the human–dog relationship becomes dysfunctional, however, there can be serious consequences for both parties and for society. Unfortunately, dysfunctional dyads are normally only identified after consequences have been felt (e.g., dog–human aggression) limiting the action that can be taken to prevent such occurrences. To evaluate whether these dysfunctional dyads can be preemptively identified, a questionnaire analyzing the owners’ dog health care histories was administered to an urban dog owning population. Multiple correspondence analysis (n = 1,385) was conducted and identified three clusters accounting for 37.1% of the total variance, while four moderate positive correlations were found: “unspecified trauma” with “vehicular trauma” (r = 0.303, p < 0.001), “bitten” with “bit other animal” (r = 0.345, p < 0.001), “bit a person” with “bit other animal” (r = 0.369, p < 0.001), and “chronic illness” with “hospitalized” (r = 0.297, p < 0.001). These results suggest that a simple questionnaire can identify potential characteristics of functional and dysfunctional dyads. In functional dyads, humans tend to be responsible for their dogs’ well-being, while dysfunctional dyads show the opposite characteristics, reporting experience with trauma and dog aggression.
AB - The human–dog relationship is at least 16,000-years old and is mutually beneficial to both dyadic members. When the human–dog relationship becomes dysfunctional, however, there can be serious consequences for both parties and for society. Unfortunately, dysfunctional dyads are normally only identified after consequences have been felt (e.g., dog–human aggression) limiting the action that can be taken to prevent such occurrences. To evaluate whether these dysfunctional dyads can be preemptively identified, a questionnaire analyzing the owners’ dog health care histories was administered to an urban dog owning population. Multiple correspondence analysis (n = 1,385) was conducted and identified three clusters accounting for 37.1% of the total variance, while four moderate positive correlations were found: “unspecified trauma” with “vehicular trauma” (r = 0.303, p < 0.001), “bitten” with “bit other animal” (r = 0.345, p < 0.001), “bit a person” with “bit other animal” (r = 0.369, p < 0.001), and “chronic illness” with “hospitalized” (r = 0.297, p < 0.001). These results suggest that a simple questionnaire can identify potential characteristics of functional and dysfunctional dyads. In functional dyads, humans tend to be responsible for their dogs’ well-being, while dysfunctional dyads show the opposite characteristics, reporting experience with trauma and dog aggression.
KW - Dysfunctional dyads
KW - Human-dog bond
KW - MCA
KW - Ownership characteristics
KW - Questionnaire
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85067476502&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.4314/ovj.v9i2.8
DO - 10.4314/ovj.v9i2.8
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85067476502
SN - 2226-4485
VL - 9
SP - 140
EP - 146
JO - Open Veterinary Journal
JF - Open Veterinary Journal
IS - 2
ER -