Animal-assisted interventions in Canada: AAI as potential field guide in/to alterity relations
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Ideas about non-human animals within animal-assisted interventions (AAI) and the general public are changing and evolving. There is, however, a dearth of empirical investigation on those changes in the AAI field. Drawing from four key findings of a qualitative Nova Scotia study that investigated AAI from the perspectives of AAI practitioners in a variety of settings, this paper examines the inter- and intra- relational dynamics of AAI in a Canadian province through 36 semi-structured interviews and four related thematic findings that emerged as illuminating trends. These themes form the basis of this paper: 1) AAI Entry point is personally motivated and AAI dyads are highly relational and intuitive; 2) AAI practitioner initiative is central to continuance and development; 3) AAI theoretical framework(s), competencies, ethics, and standards of practice are informally eclectic; and 4) Attitudes towards animals involve limited ideas about justice. An overarching purpose of this analysis was to examine the changing/evolving views of companion animals from tools/property to sentient partners within AAI practitioner perspectives and what this looks like in practice. Participants discussed entry points into AAI as personally motivated within highly relational human-animal AAI dyads. While the researchers determined practitioner initiative as crucial to AAI continuance and development, they also ask what this can tell us about how the field of AAI might contribute to or limit a critical reconceptualization of humanity; about understandings and experiences of individual and collective wellbeing within an interconnected web of life. Using a posthumanist theoretical lens and a constructivist approach to knowledge making about animal-assisted intervention and human animal interaction, this paper provides a substantial departure from the usual positivist epistemological lens used in animal assisted intervention and human animal interaction (AAI -HAI) scholarship and offers the potential to transform AAI/HAI scholarship. Exploring key findings through the emergent overarching theme of relationality, this paper aims to strengthen AAI services through a critical and creative discussion of practitioner motivations and resolve; experiences and perceived outcomes of working with and drawing inspiration from animal partners for clients and providers alike; and conceptions/misconceptions of animal justice. The broader changes in how interrelationships between people, other animals, and the environment are being conceptualized and understood must be integrated into the evolving perspectives of AAI practitioners. The authors respond with prescient optimism to the strengths and challenges of AAI in a time of transgression of planetary boundaries involving global pandemics, climate change/injustice, environmental degradation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».