No abstract

Anthropomorphic practices are increasing worldwide. Anthropomorphism is defined as the tendency to attribute human forms, behaviors, and emotions to non-human animals or objects. Anthropomorphism is particularly relevant for companion animals. Some anthropomorphic practices can be beneficial to them, whilst others can be very detrimental. Some anthropomorphic behaviors compromise the welfare and physiology of animals by interfering with thermoregulation, while others can produce dehydration due to the loss of body water, a condition that brings undesirable consequences such as high compensatory blood pressure and heat shock, even death, depending on the intensity and frequency of an animal’s exposure to these stressors. Malnutrition is a factor observed due to consumption of junk food or an imbalance in caloric proportions. This can cause obesity in pets that may have repercussions on their locomotor apparatus. Intense human–animal interaction can also lead to the establishment of attachment that impacts the mental state and behavior of animals, making them prone to develop aggression, fear, or anxiety separation syndrome. Another aspect is applying cosmetics to pets, though scientific studies have not yet determined whether cosmetic products such as coat dyes, nail polish, and lotions are beneficial or harmful for the animals, or to what extent. The cohabitation of animals in people’s homes can also constitute a public health risk due to infectious and zoonotic diseases. In this context, this paper aims to analyze the adverse effects of anthropomorphism on the welfare of companion animals from several angles—physiological, sanitary, and behavioral—based on a discussion of current scientific findings.

Recently, zookeepers’ role in monitoring and assessing zoo animal welfare is gaining importance. One hundred-sixteen zoo canid keepers responded to an online questionnaire aimed at assessing, on a 1 to 5 scoring scale, their perception of the importance and fulfilment of the Brambell’s Freedoms for zoo canids, the bond with canids under their care, and their level of job satisfaction. Results showed that zookeepers perceive the Brambell’s Freedoms as highly important (median = 5, min–max = 3–5), but not equally guaranteed (median = 3, min–max = 1–5, p < 0.01). Although there was no difference in their perception of the importance of each freedom, those related to psychological issues (median = 3, min–max = 1–5) were perceived as significantly less guaranteed than those addressing physical needs (median = 4.5, min–max = 1–5, Mann–Whitney U test, p < 0.01). Female zookeepers tended to perceive all freedoms as more important (Ordinal Logistic Regression model, p = 0.009), as well as more guaranteed (Ordinal Logistic Regression model, p = 0.007), than male zookeepers. Regardless of gender, a more positive perception of the Brambell’s Freedoms for zoo canids was associated with higher job satisfaction (Mann–Whitney U test, p < 0.01, ρ = 0.241). The latter was also positively correlated with zookeepers’ perception of the strength of the bond with the canids under their care (Spearman Rho’s correlation, p = 0.01, ρ = 0.230). Our results highlight the need for zoos to focus on guaranteeing psychological welfare of their canids. Enhancing animal welfare may increase zookeepers’ job satisfaction.

The Cat/Dog–Owner Relationship Scale (C/DORS) can be administered to both dog and cat owners. However, the scale as a whole has never been validated on a sample of dog owners. Furthermore, it has never been translated into Italian. The aim of this study was to translate the C/DORS into Italian, modify its response scale in order to improve the degree of response variability, and test its validity and reliability on a sample of dog-owners. Exploratory factor analysis revealed the same three-factor structure (Perceived Emotional Closeness = PEC, Pet–Owner Interactions = POI, Perceived Costs = PC) as the original English version, although some items had to be removed because of low- or cross-loadings. The validity of the construct was confirmed by confirmatory factor analysis, by the correlations between each of the subscales and the C/DORS total score, and by the correlations with the Lexington Attachment to Pets Scale. Cronbach’s α values for each subscale were above acceptable levels. Student owners scored higher on PEC and POI than owners with other occupations. Owners of dogs with behavioural problems scored lower on PEC and higher on PC. Keeping the dog outdoor was associated with lower POI. Finally, pet dog owners scored higher on PEC than AAI dog owners.

Since several modified Strange Situation Procedures (SSP) have been used to investigate dog-to-owner attachment, in this study two different samples of dog-owner dyads underwent two modified versions of the SSP. Dogs’ attachment style to the owner was assessed based on a novel adaptation of the attachment pattern classification used for infant-caregivers. Dogs’ behavioral data were collected using continuous sampling and, in the second protocol, also with a scoring system for greeting and social play. In both studies, secure and avoidant dogs’ behavior was compared using the Mann Whitney test, while differences within each group across episodes were analyzed using the Wilcoxon paired sample test. The classification seemed to be effective at identifying both avoidant and secure attachment patterns in dogs. As expected, differences in key attachment behaviors, such as proximity/contact seeking toward the caregiver, between secure and avoidant dogs were more evident in the final episodes of the test. Differently from secure dogs, avoidant dogs did not show an increase in proximity/contact seeking behavior with the caregiver in any of the procedures. Further studies with larger samples are needed to support the effectiveness of this classification and investigate on the remaining attachment styles.