Dog/Cat Owner relationship, stress and memory slips in everyday life
Keywords:
Human-animal relationship, Stress, Memory, Baby Boomers, Generation X, MillennialsAbstract
The purposes were to evaluate the relationship between stress and memory slips in everyday life; to compare scores between generational groups and to identify whether there is a beneficial effect of human-dog or human-cat relationships on memory slips. 640 people from Mexico participated; 368 own dogs, 188 cats, and 84 dogs and cats; 205 Gen Xers, 237 Millennials, and 198 Baby Boomers. The results showed a significant correlation between stress and memory; significant differences among generations for stress, memory slips and human-cat relationship. The Millennials generation had a higher stress score and a lower memory slips score. Generation X presented a better relationship with the cat and with the dog. The human-cat relationship showed negative and significant correlations with memory slips. When dividing by generations, it is identified that the correlation occurs exclusively for the Baby Boomer generation; A structural model confirmed that emotional closeness with the cat and perceived cost explain 31.7% of the variance of memory slips in Baby Boomer generation. The regression weights and the adjustment of the structural model support the idea that the relationship with the cat could have a protective effect on memory for the Baby Boomer generation.
References
Albright, A. E., Cui, R., & Allen, R. S. (2022). Pet ownership and mental and physical health in older White and Black males and females. International journal of environmental research and public health, 19(9), 5655. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19095655
Allen, K. (2003). Are pets a healthy pleasure? The influence of pets on blood pressure. Current directions in psychological science, 12(6), 236-239. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0963-7214.2003.01269.x
Amaya, G. J., & Prado, M. (2008). Los hijos tiranos llegan a las empresas. Trillas
Bao, K.J., & Schreer, G. (2016). Pets and Happiness: Examining the Association between Pet Ownership and Wellbeing. Anthrozoös, 29(2), 283-296. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2016.1152721
Barker, S., Knisely, J., McCain, N. & Best, A. (2005). Measuring stress and immune response in health-care professionals following interaction with a therapy dog: a pilot study. Psychological Reports, 96, 713-729. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.96.3.713-729
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. En K.A. Bollen, K., & J. S. Long (Eds.). Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Cifuentes, A. (2010). Lo que los líderes colombianos deben saber sobre las nuevas generaciones. Universidad Externado de Colombia. https://www.uexternado.edu.co/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Millennials-y-Centennials-resultados.pdf
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behaviour, 24, 385–396. https://doi.org/10.2307/2136404
Comité de Ética en Investigación UDP (2020). Orientaciones éticas para el trabajo de terreno online. https://psicologia.udp.cl/cms/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/ORIENTACIONES-ETICAS-PARA-TRABAJO-ONLINE.pdf
Crawford, J. R., Smith, G. S., Maylor, E. A., Della Sala, S., & Logie, R. H. (2003). The prospective and retrospective questionnaire (PRMQ): Normative data and latent structure in a large non clinical sample. Memory, 11, 261–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210244000027
Crawford, J.R., Henry, J.D. Ward, A. L., & Blake, J. (2006). The Prospective and Retrospective Memory Questionnaire (PRMQ): Latent structure, normative data and discrepancy analysis for proxy-ratings. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 45, 83-104. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466505X28748
Díaz Videla, M., y Olarte, M. A. (2016). Animales de compañía, personalidad humana y los beneficios percibidos por los custodios. PSIENCIA. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencia Psicológica, 8(2), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.5872/psiencia/8.2.21
Díaz, S. C., López, L. M., y Roncallo, L. L. (2017). Entendiendo las generaciones: una revisión del concepto, clasificación y características distintivas de los Baby Boomers, X y Millennials. Clío América, 11(22), 188-204. https://doi.org/10.21676/23897848.2440
Dwyer, F., Bennett, P. C., & Coleman, G. J. (2006). Development of the Monash dog owner relationship scale (MDORS). Anthrozoös, 19(3), 243-256. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279306785415592
Gee, N. R., & Mueller, M. K. (2019). A systematic review of research on pet ownership and animal interactions among older adults. Anthrozoös, 32(2), 183-207. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2019.1569903
González-Ramírez, M.T., & Landero-Hernández, R. (2007). Factor Structure of the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) in a Sample from Mexico. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 10(1), 199-206. http://www.ucm.es/info/Psi/docs/journal/v10_n1_2007/art199.pdf
González-Ramírez, M.T., y Landero-Hernández, R. (2011). Diferencias en Estrés Percibido, Salud Mental y Física de acuerdo al Tipo de Relación Humano-Perro. Revista Colombiana de Psicología, 20(1), 75-86. http://www.revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/psicologia/article/viewFile/16336/23398
González-Ramírez, M.T., & Landero-Hernández, R. (2014). Benefits of Dog Ownership: Comparative Study of Equivalent Samples. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 9(6), 311–315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2014.08.002
González-Ramírez, M. T., & Landero-Hernández, R. (2021a). Pet–human relationships: Dogs versus cats. Animals, 11(9), 2745 https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11092745
González-Ramírez, M. T. y Landero-Hernández, R. (2021b). Diferencias en tolerancia a la frustración entre Baby Boomers, Generación X y Millennial. Ansiedad y Estrés, 27(2), 89-94. https://doi.org/10.5093/anyes2021a12
González-Ramírez, M. T., & Landero-Hernández, R. (2022). Cat Coat Color, Personality Traits and the Cat-Owner Relationship Scale: A Study with Cat Owners in Mexico. Animals, 12(8), 1030. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani12081030
González-Ramírez, M. T., & Mendoza-González, M. E. (2011). Spanish version of the prospective and retrospective memory questionnaire (PRMQ-S). The Spanish journal of psychology, 14(1), 385-391. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_SJOP.2011.v14.n1.35
González-Ramírez, M. T., Quezada-Berumen, L., Vanegas-Farfano, M., & Landero- Hernández, R. (2018). The effects of dog-owner relationship on perceived stress and happiness. Human-Animal Interaction Bulletin, 6(2), 44-57. https://www.apa-hai.org/human-animal-interaction/haib/effects-dog-owner-relationship-perceived-stress-happiness/
González-Ramírez, M.T., Vanegas-Farfano, M., y Landero-Hernández, R. (2017). Versión mexicana de la escala Monash de relación del dueño con su perro (MDORS-M). Alternativas en psicología, 37, 107-123. http://www.alternativas.me/attachments/article/149/08%20-%20Versión%20mexicana%20de%20la%20escala%20Monash.pdf
Guastello, A. D., Guastello, D. D., & Guastello, S. J. (2017). Personality differences between dog people and cat people. Human-Animal Interaction Bulletin, 5(1), 41-57. https://www.human-animal-interaction.org/haib/download-info/personality-differences-dog-people-cat-people/
Gutiérrez, G., Granados, D. R., y Piar, N. (2007). Interacciones humano-animal: características e implicaciones para el bienestar de los humanos. Revista colombiana de psicología, 16(1), 163-184. https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/psicologia/article/view/1013
Howell, T. J., Bowen, J., Fatjó, J., Calvo, P., Holloway, A., & Bennett, P. C. (2017). Development of the cat-owner relationship scale (CORS). Behavioural processes, 141, 305-315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2017.02.0240376-6357
Janssens, M., Eshuis, J., Peeters, S., Lataster, J., Reijnders, J., Enders-Slegers, M. J., & Jacobs, N. (2020). The Pet-Effect in Daily Life: An Experience Sampling Study on Emotional Wellbeing in Pet Owners. Anthrozoös, 33(4), 579-588. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2020.1771061
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1984). LISREL-VI user’s guide (3rd ed.). Scientific Software.
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer.
Lima, M., Mateus, T. L., & Silva, K. (2022). With or Without You: Beneficial and Detrimental Associations Between Companion Dogs and Human Psychological Adjustment During a COVID-19 Lockdown Phase. Anthrozoös, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2022.2042081
Meléndez, L. (2014). El vínculo humano-animal y sus implicaciones para la psicología en Puerto Rico. Revista Puertorriqueña de Psicología, 25(2), 160-182. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2016-04264-001
Odendaal, J. S. J., & Meintjes, R. A. (2003). Neuro-physiological correlates of affiliative behaviour between humans and dogs. The Veterinary Journal, 165, 296-301. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-0233(02)00237-X
Pellicer-Porcar, O., Mirete-Fructuoso, M., Molina-Rodríguez, S., y Soto-Amaya, J. (2014). Quejas subjetivas de memoria en adultos jóvenes: influencia del estado emocional. Revista de Neurología, 59(12), 543-550. https://www.neurologia.com/articulo/2014457
Penagos, M. P. (2018). Adaptación de gestión humana para recibir a la generación Z (Centennials) en las grandes empresas del Valle de Aburrá (Tesis de doctorado, Universidad EIA). https://repository.eia.edu.co/handle/11190/2219repository.eia.edu.co/handle/11190/2219
Pérez-Escoda, A., Castro-Zubizarreta, A., y Fandos-Igado, M. (2016). La competencia digital de la Generación Z: claves para su introducción curricular en la Educación Primaria. Comunicar, 24(49), 71-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.3916/C49-2016-07
Rijken, M., & van Beek, S. (2011). About cats and dogs. Reconsidering the relationship between pet ownership and health related outcomes in community-dwelling elderly. Social Indicators Research, 102(3), 373-388. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11205-010-9690-8
Roberts, L. D., & Sipes, J. B. A. (2018). Ethical issues in online research. En M. M. Leach & E. R. Welfel (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of applied psychological research (pp.474-492). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316417287.024
Rodríguez, K. E., Herzog, H., & Gee, N. R. (2021). Variability in human-animal interaction research. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 1207. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.619600
Rönnlund, M., Mäntylä, T. & Nilsson, L.-G. (2008). The Prospective and Retrospective Memory Questionnaire (PRMQ): Factorial structure, relations to global subjective memory ratings, and Swedish norms. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 49, 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2007.00600.x
Ruiz, M. (2000). Introducción a los modelos de ecuaciones estructurales. Ediciones UNED.
Schwabe, L., Hermans, E. J., Joëls, M., & Roozendaal, B. (2022). Mechanisms of memory under stress. Neuron, 110(9), 1450-1467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2022.02.020
Smith, G., Della Sala, S., Logie, R.H., & Maylor, E.A. (2000). Prospective and Retrospective Memory in Normal Aging and Dementia: A Questionnaire Study. Memory, 8, 311-321. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210050117735
Taniguchi, Y., Seino, S., Headey, B., Hata, T., Ikeuchi, T., Abe, T., Shinkai, S., & Kitamura, A. (2022). Evidence that dog ownership protects against the onset of disability in an older community-dwelling Japanese population. PLoS one, 17(2), e0263791. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263791
Utz, R. L. (2014). Walking the dog: The effect of pet ownership on human health and health behaviors. Social Indicators Research, 116(2), 327-339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0299-6
Wolf, O. T. (2009). Stress and memory in humans: Twelve years of progress? Brain Research, 1293, 142–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2009.04.013
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2023 Mónica Teresa Gonzaáez-Ramírez, René Landero-Hernández
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The authors who publish in this journal accept the following conditions:
1. The authors retain the copyright and assign to the journal the right to first publication, with the work registered under the Creative Commons Attribution license, which allows third parties to use what has been published as long as they mention the authorship of the work and the first publication in this journal.
2. Authors may make other independent and additional contractual agreements for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the article published in this journal (e.g., inclusion in an institutional repository or publication in a book) provided that they clearly indicate that the work was first published in this journal.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to publish their work on the Internet (e.g., on institutional or personal pages) before and during the review and publication process, as this may lead to productive exchanges and greater and faster dissemination of published work (see The Effect of Open Access).
