The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Pets in the Family: An Evolutionary Perspective
Abstract
Pets have become such a common component of modern family life that we tend to take them for granted. Nevertheless, from an evolutionary standpoint, pets present us with a paradox comparable to—though even more puzzling than—that posed by the phenomenon of adoption. In the latter case, one can at least argue that adoptive parents may derive deferred fitness benefits from the future contribution of adopted children to the family economy (Kramer, 2005). But in the case of adopted pets, such contributions appear to be minimal at best, whereas the level of investment in their care and sustenance is sometimes considerable. The paradox further intensifies when one considers that pet keeping is not confined to modern, affluent societies, but is widespread among subsistence hunters and horticulturalists whose opportunities to engage in nonfitness enhancing behavior would appear to be much more constrained. This chapter critically examines theories that purport to explain how pet keeping evolved and why it continues to persist and flourish in a wide range of cultures. Given the current state of knowledge, few firm conclusions can be drawn at this time regarding the possible adaptive consequences of pet keeping. However, it is possible to highlight future areas of research that may help to illuminate the functional significance (if any) of this intriguing behavior.
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
“As noted by Bowen [78] and others [43,44,54,79,80,81], pets are often an integral part of the family structure.”
From Disenfranchised Guilt-Pet Owners' Burden. (2022) · cites this paper as [81]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Holland, K. E., Owczarczak-Garstecka, S. C., Anderson, K. L., Casey, R. A., Christley, R. M., Harris, L., McMillan, K. M., Mead, R., Murray, J. K., Samet, L., et al. (2021) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani11010240 · Cited by 84
Disenfranchised Guilt-Pet Owners' Burden.
Kogan, L. R., Bussolari, C., Currin-McCulloch, J., Packman, W., & Erdman, P. (2022) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani12131690 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Serpell, J. A., & Paul, E. S.
- Affiliations
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- University of Bristol (GB)
- Venue
- Oxford Handbooks Online
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Published
- 2011-05-27
- OpenAlex
- W307152275
- Cited by
- 69
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3
- FWCI
- 2.35
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Explore Bristol Research (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
- Keywords
- pet ownership, human-animal relations, evolutionary psychology, domestication, cultural evolution, adaptive significance, human-animal bond
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pets in the Family: An Evolutionary Perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396690.013.0017
- The paper
- Serpell, J. A., & Paul, E. S. (2011). Pets in the Family: An Evolutionary Perspective. Oxford Handbooks Online. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396690.013.0017