Peoples Impressions of Owners of Pets - Lab Report Example

People’s impressions of owners of pets This research investigated people’s impressions of the owners of four different pets; a dog, a cat, an exotic fish, and a python. People’s impressions were recorded on a scale of 1 to 6 for different inventory items related to the owners of the different pets. The meanings of digits 1 to 6 varied from one inventory item to another and were mentioned on the questionnaire survey. Average of the scores for each inventory item was drawn using MS Excel for each of the four owners. Results were interpreted by comparing the average scores for each inventory item among the four owners and conclusions were accordingly drawn. Introduction This experiment was carried out to investigate the impressions people generally have of the owners of different pets. Pet ownership is a common human behavior. The Darwinian perspective calls pet ownership a puzzling behavior as the owner receives no apparent benefit from the pet by providing for it given the pet belongs to another species (Archer, 1997). Cats and dogs are very popular pets in the western world because they can run around freely in the owners’ space and the owners can interact with them more closely compared to other pets. A small number of studies have systematically explored the relationship between owners and the pets in terms of attachment that as a concept is generally used for members of the same species (Bowlby, 1969; Ainsworth, 1989). Katcher et al. (1983) studied owners’ positive attachment with their pet dogs using a 10-item questionnaire instrument that comprised statements like carrying a photograph of the pet dog, allowing it to sleep on bed, interaction between the owner and the dog, and the owner’s act of referring to the dog as a family member. Administration of the scale to 80 veterinary clinic clients and calculation of the frequency data for the items showed that the owners had high attachment with their pet dogs. Largo et al. (1988) conducted factor analysis using a ‘pet relationship scale’ which was based, in part, on the attachment indicating features. The researchers identified a main factor consisting of the items showing affectionate companionship. The kinds of pets people keep indicate their personality choices and nature. Literature review suggests that this topic has not been researched much. While there is some research over the ownership of pet dogs and pet cats, there is very little research on the ownership of pet exotic fish and pet pythons. This research fills this gap in the literature by drawing comparison in the public impressions of the ownership of dogs, cats, exotic fish, and pythons. The Experimental Hypothesis was; People have the most positive impression of owners of dogs, followed by owners of cats, then of exotic fish, and lastly of pythons. Method Design This experiment is based on participants’ ratings on a 6-point Likert scale for each inventory item. The independent variables in the experiment are the pet-owners whereas the dependent variables are the inventory items. Participants Total number of participants included in the study was 90. Of these, there were 23 dog-owners, 22 cat-owners, 22 python-owners, and 23 fish-owners. The number of male and female participants was equal i.e. 45 male pet-owners and 45 female pet-owners. Materials A total of 12 inventory items were included in the questionnaire. On a scale of 1 to 6, the participants were asked to rate the pets. The inventory items in the order of 1 to 6 on the scale included mainly optimistic/ mainly pessimistic, has small income/ has large income, has few friends/ has lots of friends, has few qualific’s/ well-qualified, home neat and clean/ home untidy and dirty, lives in present/ plans for future, well-respected/ little respect, self-reliant/ dependent on others, self-centered/ concern for others, few ambitions/ very ambitious, concerned re Env./ not worried, and little exercise/ exercises a lot respectively. Procedure Potential participants were approached individually and were asked for their willingness to fill the questionnaire. The consenting participants were given the description slips and were asked to imagine the person described in the paper in words. After the description slips were taken back, the participants were given the inventory and were asked to write their thoughts about the person in their own words on a blank piece of paper. The description slips were matched to the numbers on the personality inventory. This process took almost 13 minutes. Each participant was allowed an additional 3 minutes to complete the survey. After the inventory was completed by the participants, the type of pet was written at the top of the inventory. Results Average rating for the inventory item of mainly optimistic/ mainly pessimistic for dog-, cat-, python-, and fish-owners was 2.9, 2.9, 3.0, and 3.9 respectively as shown in Fig. 1. These values suggest that dog- and cat-owners have an impression of being more optimistic than python and fish owners. However, there is substantial pessimism associated with the fish-owners whereas difference between the impressions of other owners on this scale is negligible. Fig.1. Average ratings of the pet owners on the inventory item ‘mainly optimistic/ mainly pessimistic’ Average rating for the inventory item of has small income/ has large income for dog-, cat-, python-, and fish-owners was 3.8, 3.8, 3.0, and 3.2 respectively as shown in Fig. 2. These values suggest that dog- and cat-owners are perceived to be richer compared to the python- and fish-owners. Fig. 2. Average ratings of the pet owners on the inventory item ‘has small income/ has large income’ Average rating for the inventory item of has few friends/ has lots of friends for dog-, cat-, python-, and fish-owners was 3.7, 3.1, 3.1, and 3.2 respectively as shown in Fig. 3. These values suggest that dog-owners are perceived to be more social compared to the other three pet-owners. Fig. 3. Average ratings of the pet owners on the inventory item ‘has few friends/ has lots of friends’ Average rating for the inventory item of has few qualific’s/ well-qualified for dog-, cat-, python-, and fish-owners was 4.6, 4.4, 3.6, and 3.9 respectively. Average rating for the inventory item of home neat and clean/ home untidy and dirty for dog-, cat-, python-, and fish-owners was 3.5, 2.4, 4.5, and 2.6 respectively. Average rating for the inventory item of lives in present/ plans for future for dog-, cat-, python-, and fish-owners was 3.5, 3.6, 3.2, and 3.4 respectively. Average rating for the inventory item of well-respected/ little respect for dog-, cat-, python-, and fish-owners was 2.7, 3.0, 3.9, and 3.7 respectively. Average rating for the inventory item of self-reliant/ dependent on others for dog-, cat-, python-, and fish-owners was 2.3, 2.3, 2.3, and 3.6 respectively. Average rating for the inventory item of self-centered/ concern for others for dog-, cat-, python-, and fish-owners was 4.0, 3.7, 3.0, and 2.9 respectively. Average rating for the inventory item of few ambitions/ very ambitious for dog-, cat-, python-, and fish-owners was 4.0, 4.2, 3.1, and 3.2 respectively. Average rating for the inventory item of concerned re Env./ not worried for dog-, cat-, python-, and fish-owners was 3.9, 3.2, 3.8, and 3.5 respectively. Average rating for the inventory item of little exercise/ exercises a lot for dog-, cat-, python-, and fish-owners was 4.0, 2.8, 2.9, and 2.9 respectively as shown in Fig. 4. These values suggest that dog-owners are perceived to be physically more active compared to the other three pet-owners. Fig. 4. Average ratings of the pet owners on the inventory item ‘little exercise/ exercises a lot’ Discussion Results of this research depict that generally dog- and cat-owners have better life-styles, personality, and nature compared to the owners of pet fish and pet python. Results of this research were not in line with findings of the past research. For example, dog-owners in this research were found to have the maximum friends among all other pet-owners. Past research suggests, “It makes sense that a dog person is going to be more lively, because theyre going to want to be out there, outside, talking to people, bringing their dog…Whereas, if youre more introvert and sensitive, maybe youre more at home reading a book, and your cat doesnt need to go outside for a walk” (Guastello cited in Adkins, 2014). Furthermore, this research found that cat-owners live in more neat and tidy homes than dog-owners. Animal Planet suggests that cats are better pets than dogs because cats are natural insect repellants (Animal Planet, 2014). With few exceptions, the original hypothesis that mentioned that people generally have the best impression of dog-owners, followed by cat-, fish-, and then python-owners has been found to be true. The experiment could have been improved by including equal number of participants i.e. nearly equal number of dog-owners, cat-owners, fish-owners, and python-owners in the research. Future research should study the same topic but include participants most of which are python- or fish-owners; results of this research are likely to be biased in favor of the dog- and cat-owners because dogs and cats are more common pets in the west than fish and pythons. Future research can include snake-charmers and fishermen as the participants and conduct the experiment using the same methodology. It is likely that their results would be more biased in favor of the fish- and python-owners, though it primarily depends upon the sample selected and the design of study. References: Adkins, S 2014, Cat Owners Are Smarter Than Dog Owners, Study, University Herald, [Online] Available at http://www.universityherald.com/articles/9744/20140604/cat-owners-smarter-dog-carroll-canine-pets.htm [accessed: 3 November 2014]. Ainsworth, MDS 1989, Attachments beyond infancy, American Psychologist, Vol. 44, pp. 709-716. Animal Planet 2014, Top 10 Reasons Why Cats are Better Pets than Dogs, [Online] Available at http://www.animalplanet.com/pets/i-like-top-ten-cats-better-dogs.htm [accessed: 3 November 2014]. Archer, J 1997, Why do people love their pets? Evolution and Human Behavior, Vol. 18, pp. 237-259. Bowlby, J 1969, Attachment and Loss, Volume 1. Attachment, London: The Hogarth Press and Institute of Psychoanalysis, Penguin edition. Katcher, AH, Friedmann, E, Goodman, M, and Goodman, L 1983, Men, women, and dogs, Californian Veterinarian, Vol. 2, pp. 14-16. Largo, D, Kafer, R, Delaney, M, and Connell, C 1988, Assessment of favorable attitudes toward pets: Development and preliminary validation of self-report pet relationship scales, Anthrozoos, Vol. 1, pp. 240-254. Read More