4.2 Review

Human-Animal Interaction and Human Prosociality: A Meta-Analytic Review of Experimental and Correlational Studies

Journal

ANTHROZOOS
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/08927936.2023.2288745

Keywords

Animal-assisted therapy; empathy; human-animal interaction; pet ownership; prosocial

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Pet ownership and interactions with animals have physiological and psychological benefits, increasing empathy and prosocial behaviors in humans. The type of prosociality measure, nature of human-animal interaction, animal species, and animal class significantly moderate this relationship. These findings have important implications for theory, methodology, and practical applications, and suggest directions for further research.
Pet ownership and interactions with animals confer various physiological and psychological benefits to humans. Although interactions with animals are commonplace, there is no consensus in the literature on the actual impact of animal exposure on prosociality. Hence, this meta-analysis investigated 20 eligible studies (n = 4,116, k = 48) and provided an extensive examination into the different potential moderators of the relationship between human-animal interaction (HAI) and prosociality, such as the distinction between empathy and prosocial behavior, HAI characteristics, and sample characteristics. Overall, a small positive effect size was found (d = 0.22), suggesting that human exposure to animals is associated with an increase in empathy and prosocial behaviors. Additionally, the type of prosociality measure, nature of human-animal interaction, animal species, and animal class significantly moderated the relationship between human-animal interaction and prosociality. We discuss the theoretical, methodological, and practical implications of these findings and highlight areas for further research.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available