MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414614378 · doi:10.1079/hai.2025.0041

Three’s company? Examining the association between dog ownership and intimacy, jealousy, and satisfaction in romantic couples

2025· article· en· W4414614378 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman-Animal Interactions · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJealousyAssociation (psychology)RomancePositive relationshipInterpersonal relationshipComputer-assisted web interviewingScale (ratio)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background : Dogs in North American households are increasingly seen as integral parts of the family. Yet, limited research has been conducted exploring how dog ownership affects romantic relationships. To explore these dynamics, we examined the association of dogs with romantic relationship elements using work-family conflict, resource allocation, attachment, and family systems theories. Methods : An online cross-sectional survey was conducted with 354 adults (18+) living in the United States or Canada who currently live with a partner/spouse and have owned a dog for at least 6 months. Participants were recruited through Prolific in May 2025. The survey assessed time allocation, jealousy dynamics, intimacy, sleep impact, task division, and agreement on dog- and veterinary-related decisions. Relationship satisfaction was measured using the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS). Multiple linear regressions examined predictors of dog-related associations with relationship outcomes. Results : While 69% of participants associated dog ownership with positive relationship impacts, significant challenges were also noted. Approximately 30–35% of participants reported dog care frequently diverted time from their partner. A substantial minority experienced jealousy over partner-pet cuddling (25%) and intrusion during shared activities (22%). Dogs negatively impacted sleep for 29% and sexual intercourse for 23% of participants. Women reported disproportionately handling dog care tasks. Regression analyses revealed that greater time spent on dog tasks, higher jealousy levels, and lower agreement on dog-related decisions were significantly associated with lower relationship satisfaction. Conclusions : Dogs introduce complex dynamics into romantic partnerships that parallel, yet differ from, challenges associated with human children. While predominantly positive, successful dog integration requires proactive communication, realistic expectations, and equitable task distribution. These findings highlight the potential value of pre-adoption counseling and clinical interventions for addressing pet-related relationship dynamics. Results should be interpreted with caution, however, given the study’s reliance on a convenience sample, the use of unvalidated assessment instruments, and subjective reporting from only one partner.

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.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.324 · 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