The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Animal Hoarding Disorder: A new psychopathology?
Abstract
This study aimed to characterize the sociodemographic profile of animal hoarders in a southern city of Brazil. In addition, it aimed to propose Animal Hoarding Disorder as a new nosological category, distinct from Hoarding Disorder. Thirty-three individuals with Animal Hoarding Disorder, 73% female and 60% elderly, composed the sample. The average age of the sample was 61.39 years (SD = 12.69) and the average period that individuals hoarded or lived with a large number of animals was 23.09 years (SD = 15.98.) It was observed that 56.7% of the sample hoarded other inanimate objects, besides the animals. The total number of hoarded animals was 1.357 and the average number of animals per hoarder was approximately 41 (SD = 24.41). Significant differences between hoarding disorder and animal hoarding are discussed. Unlike hoarded objects, hoarded animals generally do not obstruct domicile environments. The processes of disengaging from or donating animals also differ from those of object hoarding, since there is an affectional bond with lives and not with unanimated objects. In this sense, the characterization of Animal Hoarding Disorder as a new mental disorder may arouse great interest from both clinical professionals and researchers.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“what defines the disorder is not just the number of animals but the inability of the owner to provide the minimum necessary care for them, to recognize their suffering and to provide them with appropriate sanitary conditions [177,235,276,277,278].”
From The Complexity of the Human–Animal Bond: Empathy, Attachment and Anthropomorphism in Human–Animal Relationships and Animal Hoarding (2022) · cites this paper as [276]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- Calvo, 2014, Characteristics of 24 cases of animal hoarding in Spain, Anim. Welf., 23, 199, 10.7120/09627286.23.2.199 · DOI
- Frost, 2015, The hoarding of animals: an update, Psychiatr. Times, 32, 47
- Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium (HARC), 2002, Health implications of animal hoarding, Health Soc. Work., 27, 125, 10.1093/hsw/27.2.125 · DOI
- Irigaray, 2016, Elder abuse in Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil: a documentary study, Estud. Psicol. (Camp.)., 33, 543, 10.1590/1982-02752016000300017 · DOI
- Joffe, 2014, Characteristics of persons convicted for offences relating to animal hoarding in New South Wales, Aust. Vet. J., 92, 369, 10.1111/avj.12249 · DOI
- Nathanson, 2009, Animal hoarding: slipping into the darkness of comorbid animal and self-neglect, J. Elder Abus. Negl., 21, 307, 10.1080/08946560903004839 · DOI · Paper page
- Ockenden, 2014, Animal hoarding in Victoria, Australia: an exploratory study, Anthrozoos, 27, 33, 10.2752/175303714X13837396326332 · DOI
- Patronek, 1999, Hoarding of animals: an under-recognized public health problem in a difficult-to-study population, Public Health Rep., 114, 81, 10.1093/phr/114.1.81 · DOI · Paper page
- Reinisch, 2008, Understanding the human aspects of animal hoarding, Can. Vet. J., 49, 1211
- Reinisch, 2009, Characteristics of six recent animal hoarding cases in Manitoba, Can. Vet. J., 50, 1069
- Saldarriaga-Cantillo, 2015, Noah Syndrome: a variant of Diogenes Syndrome accompanied by animal hoarding practices, J. Elder Abus. Negl., 27, 270, 10.1080/08946566.2014.978518 · DOI
- Steketee, 2011, Characteristics and antecedents of people who hoard animals: an exploratory comparative interview study, Rev. Gen. Psychol., 15, 114, 10.1037/a0023484 · DOI · Paper page
- Svanberg, 2016, The Swedish Swan Lady, Soc. Anim., 24, 63, 10.1163/15685306-12341388 · DOI
- Worth, 1981, Multiple ownership of animals in New York City, Trans. Stud. Coll. Physicians Phila., 3, 280
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Prato-Previde, E., Basso Ricci, E., & Colombo, E. S. (2022) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani12202835 · Cited by 121
Metadata
- Authors
- Ferreira, E. A., Paloski, L. H., Costa, D. B., Fiametti, V. S., De Oliveira, C. R., de Lima Argimon, I. I., Gonzatti, V., & Irigaray, T. Q.
- Venue
- Psychiatry Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-12
- Volume
- 258
- Pages
- 221-225
- ISSN
- 0165-1781
- Cited by
- 37
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review