How Prevalent Are Invertebrates in Human-Animal Scholarship? Scoping Study of Anthrozoös and Society & Animals

Abstract

The field of Human-Animal Studies (HAS) is about human-animal relations. However, which nonhuman animals does the field encompass? In recent years, some scholars have noted a bias towards vertebrate species, especially domesticated mammals. To assess how prevalent (or not) invertebrates have been in HAS scholarship, a three-stage scoping study was conducted of two pioneering journals in the field: Anthrozoös and Society & Animals. This article reports on preliminary findings and confirms that human-animal scholarship, as presented in these two leading journals, is characterized by “institutional vertebratism,” albeit the extent of this invertebrate knowledge gap needs to be fully assessed. If the next generation of HAS scholars are to comprehend the extensive range of interspecies contexts, they must be more inclusive in terms of the diversity of animal species studied. Widening the species net is therefore a necessary corrective to address vertebrate bias in this field.

Human Health Benefits of Non-Conventional Companion Animals: A Narrative Review

“…The relatively low number of studies included and species represented in the research identified for this review reinforces the assertion made by Wilkie and Moore [7] that human-animal research overwhelmingly studies specific animals, such as vertebrates and mammals, to the exclusion of others. Furthermore, exactly which species are included in companion animal studies can be difficult to ascertain because animals other than cats and dogs are often reported in a category labelled only as "other" [39].…”

“…Seven overarching themes describe the possible processes or mechanisms by which companion animals may benefit their human guardians' health: (1) Companionship and Attachment, (2) Social Facilitators, (3) Purpose and Routine, (4) Connectedness with nature, (5) Decoration and Aesthetics, and (6) Physiological Benefits. There was an additional theme for (7) Commercial Media, in which human health benefits of companion animals were discussed in non-scientific contexts, and explanatory mechanisms of health benefits were not evident. Participants described varying levels of attachment to companion reptiles, ranging to "like" and "love".…”

“…In contrast to this, one criticism is the field's focus on dogs, cats, and to a lesser extent horses [6]. These animals are domesticated, trained, and highly accessible for study due to their popularity in many countries [6][7][8][9].…”

The Welfare of Animals in Australian Filmed Media

“…Though ethical discourse is useful, animal welfare regulations should be based on evidence-based findings rather than popular mediaconstructed and often anthropomorphised narratives. Nevertheless, there is certainly a research bias towards domesticated mammalian vertebrates [60].…”