Puppy love in the time of Corona: dog ownership protects against loneliness for those living alone during the COVID-19 lockdown.
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in many countries enforcing a 'lockdown', whereby people are instructed to stay at home. AIM: The aim of this study was to capture the experience of such a lockdown in Australians living alone, with and without a dog or a cat. METHOD: Three hundred and eighty-four participants completed an online survey evaluating their levels of loneliness, mindfulness and mood. For participants who owned a dog or a cat, a measure of dog/cat interactions was also administered as well as two open-ended questions about how being a pet owner affected their experience of COVID-19 and how COVID-19 affected their pet. RESULTS: Contrary to expectations, cat owners were found to be less mindful than non-owners and pet interactions did not account for levels of loneliness or levels of mindfulness. In line with our expectations, however, stress and depression positively predicted loneliness, while mindfulness and being a dog owner were protective against it. Insights from qualitative responses suggest that this might be due to the fact that dogs encourage a routine which involves getting out of the house and walking, which itself offers opportunities to socialise with other people doing the same thing. CONCLUSION: These findings add to the emerging literature on mental well-being during a lockdown and the unique role that pets play in their owners' experiences.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Walking a dog and being a dog owner have been associated with lower depression.
“Because walking a dog and being a dog owner have been associated with lower depression, these were categorized as protective factors (37–39).”
From The Evolution of Psychological and Behavioral Consequences of Self-Isolation During Lockdown: A Longitudinal Study Across United Kingdom and Italy (2022) · cites this paper as [39]
The Discussion says walking can improve mood and well-being, and dog owners reported that their dogs encouraged walks. But the Results identify dog ownership as protective against loneliness, not depression; the reported mean depression scores for dog owners and non-owners were nearly identical. The source therefore does not support the claim that both dog walking and dog ownership are associated with lower depression. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredDog ownership and dog walking can be considered protective factors during lockdown.
“Dog ownership and dog walking can therefore be considered protective factors during lockdown (37–39).”
From The Evolution of Psychological and Behavioral Consequences of Self-Isolation During Lockdown: A Longitudinal Study Across United Kingdom and Italy (2022) · cites this paper as [39]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 34 · Cited by 152
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Garcia B. S. (2020). A dogs impact: People’s lived experience of the role of dog companionship on their wellbeing and sense of purpose [Unpublished Graduate Diploma dissertation]. Monash University.
- Authors
- Oliva, J. L., & Johnston, K. L.
- Affiliations
- Monash University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Oliva, Jessica Lee
- Venue
- International Journal of Social Psychiatry
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2020-07-23
- Volume
- 67
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 232-242
- ISSN
- 0020-7640 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-2854
- PMC
- PMC7383093
- OpenAlex
- W3043892925
- Cited by
- 152
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 2
- FWCI
- 15.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- correction (2021-02-03)
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- International Journal of Social Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ResearchOnline at James Cook University (James Cook University) (submittedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Urban Green Space and Health
- Keywords
- pet ownership, dog ownership, cat ownership, loneliness, COVID-19 lockdown, living alone, mindfulness, psychological well-being, stress, depression, human-animal interaction, Australian adults
- MeSH terms
- Physical Distancing, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Animals, Australia, Human-Animal Bond, Cats, Communicable Disease Control, Dogs, Female, Humans, Loneliness, Male, Mental Health, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Isolation, Stress, Psychological, Protective Factors
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