The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pet Attachment and Dissociation
Abstract
This study replicated the co-existence of dissociation and pet attachment in 113 female veterinary technician students based on a bivariate correlation analysis and chi-square analysis of their responses to the 28-question Dissociative Experiences Scale and an eight-question "pet" attachment questionnaire.The study replicated the positive correlation between pet attachment and dissociation first reported by Brown & Katcher (1997). Also replicated was the finding that significantly more with the highest pet attachment had clinical levels of dissociation than did those with lower attachment. Results compared to a meta-analytic study found their level of dissociation to be higher than participants in non-animalrelated categories.This study suggests that dissociation may characterize one subset of people highly attached to pets and discusses implications for companion animal research and individuals in animal-related careers.
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 a sample of college students, dissociation was positively associated with attachment to companion animals, and this result was replicated in another student sample.
“Indeed, in [309] it was reported that in a sample of college students, dissociation was positively associated with attachment to companion animals, and this result was then replicated in another student sample [310].”
From The Complexity of the Human–Animal Bond: Empathy, Attachment and Anthropomorphism in Human–Animal Relationships and Animal Hoarding (2022) · cites this paper as [310]
Citations
Cites
van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & Schuengel, C. (1996) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/0272-7358(96)00006-2 · Cited by 643
Dissociative Experiences in the General Population: A Factor Analysis
Ross, C. A., Joshi, S., & Currie, R. (1991) · Psychiatric Services · doi:10.1176/ps.42.3.297 · Cited by 195
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Future Directions in Human-Animal Bond Research
Beck, A. M., & Katcher, A. H. (2003) · American Behavioral Scientist · doi:10.1177/0002764203255214 · Cited by 280
Self-citationPrato-Previde, E., Basso Ricci, E., & Colombo, E. S. (2022) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani12202835 · Cited by 121
Orlando, E. M., & Chin, B. N. (2025) · Human-Animal Interactions · doi:10.1079/hai.2025.0005 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Brown, S.-E., & Katcher, A.
- Affiliations
- 1Tuskegee University, USA
- 2University of Pennsylvania and People, Animals and Nature, Inc. (PAN)
- Venue
- Society & Animals
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 2001
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 25-41
- ISSN
- 1063-1119
- 1568-5306
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 2
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
