Pet facilitated therapy and the therapeutic relationship: participant perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study examines Pet Facilitated Therapy (PFT) from the perspective of the participant/client in an initial counselling session. The use of the human-animal bond to facilitate therapy is a relatively new and growing field. Existing research has focused on quantitative measures, third party ratings, or therapists' perspectives. A specific focus of this research is how the presence of a dog affects participants' perceptions of the therapeutic relationship between the participant and counsellor. In order to use PFT as a therapeutic adjunct most effectively and purposefully, it is important to better understand how PFT recipients experience a pet's presence in counselling settings. 11 Three female and two male participants ranging in age from forty-six to seventy two were solicited from patients on the Rehabilitation Unit of a local hospital. Each participant took part in an audio taped initial counselling session at which a trained therapy dog was present. I participated in the research, acting as both counsellor and researcher. Interviews were conducted by a fellow graduate student to elicit participants' perceptions of the experience. Interview transcripts and other contextual data were analyzed thematically utilizing grounded theory methodology. Results of this study were expressed through two primary themes: the first theme focused on what roles participants attributed to the dog's presence, and the second theme concerned what factors contributed to how the participants experienced the session. Participants indicated that the dog's presence tranquilized or relaxed them, was indicative of my attributes as therapist, and prompted emotional memories. Significant factors which affected how participants experienced the PFT session included the therapist's skill and way of being, tactile contact with the pet, previous emotional attachment to pets, and the participant's self-perception or way of being. This study affirms the primacy of the client-counsellor relationship, and offers new insight into what contributions a pet's presence may make to counselling. As a result of this research, I formed a new conceptualization of the "therapeutic relationship", which includes an understanding of the roles that therapists and pets play as both distinct and overlapping. This new understanding includes potential benefits of PFT which are independent of the therapist (such as the pet's role in helping the participant/client to relax), and benefits which involve the pet and therapist (such as the dog as an indicator of therapist attributes). Similarly, the therapist's role in the relationship with the participant/client is based on therapist skills and attributes which are independent of the pet, but also includes elements of overlap with the pet's presence, as when the therapist interacts with the pet. This thesis is about beginning to explore and share a missing component from PFT research: the client's voice. n1.rticipants' contributions, for which I am most grateful, have both validated some of the assumptions and beliefs found within PFT research to date, and offered new ways of understanding the potential benefits of the human-animal bond to counselling.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".