Insights into Canadians’ Perceptions of Service Dogs in Public Spaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Service Dogs (SDs) are an increasingly common type of working dog supporting people with disabilities in Canada. One of the groups being paired with SDs is Veterans diagnosed with posttraumatic stress injuries (PTSIs). In past research, Veterans have expressed stress over negative interactions with people in public spaces because an SD brings attention to their disability. There is a dearth of research exploring perceptions of SDs in public settings. METHODS: A total of 485 Canadians were surveyed via an online questionnaire about their demographic information and beliefs about SDs in public spaces. Data were analyzed using robust ordinary least squares (OLS) regression to determine which demographic features, if any, contribute to perceptions. RESULTS: Generally, the Canadian public holds highly positive perceptions of SDs being in public spaces. Our analysis found that women, people who currently have pets, and Indigenous people were more supportive of SDs in public spaces than others. People with certain cultural heritages were less receptive. CONCLUSION: These findings are an important beginning contribution to the growing SD and Veteran health field.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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".