MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387502018 · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-43680-z

Exploring the role of our contacts with pets in broadening concerns for animals, nature, and fellow humans: a representative study

2023· article· en· W4387502018 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Catherine E. Amiot, Christophe Gagné, Brock Bastian

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAnimal-assisted therapyContext (archaeology)HUBzeroNormativeIngroups and outgroupsSolidarityAnimal welfarePsychologySocial psychologyIdentification (biology)Human DimensionPet therapyHuman rightsGeographyBiologyPolitical scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While pet ownership is normative in many occidental countries, whether humans' proximal contacts with pets have implications for attitudes and behaviors toward other (non pet) animals, nature, and fellow humans, has received limited empirical attention. In a large representative sample, we investigate whether pet ownership and positive contact with pets are associated with more positive attitudes and heightened concerns for non-pet animals, nature, and human outgroups. A cross-sectional questionnaire survey was conducted among Canadian adults (619 pet owners, 450 non-pet owners). Pet owners reported more positive attitudes toward non-pet animals (e.g., wild, farm animals), higher identification with animals, more positive attitudes toward human outgroups, higher biospheric environmental concerns, higher human-environment interdependence beliefs, and lower usual meat consumption. Positive contact with pets was also associated with most of these outcomes. Solidarity with animals, a dimension of identification with animals, emerged as a particularly clear predictor of these outcomes and mediated the associations between positive contact with pets and positive attitudes toward non-pet animals, biospheric, egoistic, and altruistic environmental concerns, human-environment interdependence beliefs, and diet. Our results provide support for the capacity of pets to shape human consideration for a broad range of social issues, beyond the specific context of human-pet relations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.196
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207