CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 37

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Animal Hoarding Disorder: A new psychopathology?

Ferreira, Elisa Arrienti, Paloski, Luis Henrique, Costa, Dalton Breno, Fiametti, Vânia Saretta, De Oliveira, Camila Rosa, de Lima Argimon, Irani Iracema, Gonzatti, Valéria, Irigaray, Tatiana Quarti·2017·Psychiatry Research
DOI 10.1016/j.psychres.2017.08.030
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psychres.2017.08.030

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. Calvo, 2014, Characteristics of 24 cases of animal hoarding in Spain, Anim. Welf., 23, 199, 10.7120/09627286.23.2.199 · DOI
  2. Frost, 2015, The hoarding of animals: an update, Psychiatr. Times, 32, 47
  3. Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium (HARC), 2002, Health implications of animal hoarding, Health Soc. Work., 27, 125, 10.1093/hsw/27.2.125 · DOI
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. 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
  7. Ockenden, 2014, Animal hoarding in Victoria, Australia: an exploratory study, Anthrozoos, 27, 33, 10.2752/175303714X13837396326332 · DOI
  8. 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
  9. Reinisch, 2008, Understanding the human aspects of animal hoarding, Can. Vet. J., 49, 1211
  10. Reinisch, 2009, Characteristics of six recent animal hoarding cases in Manitoba, Can. Vet. J., 50, 1069
  11. 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
  12. 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
  13. Svanberg, 2016, The Swedish Swan Lady, Soc. Anim., 24, 63, 10.1163/15685306-12341388 · DOI
  14. Worth, 1981, Multiple ownership of animals in New York City, Trans. Stud. Coll. Physicians Phila., 3, 280

Cited by

Sorted by citations

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
DOI
10.1016/j.psychres.2017.08.030
Cited by
37
References
0
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)

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