The Impact of Pets on Human Health and Psychological Well-Being: Fact, Fiction, or Hypothesis?
Abstract
Because of extensive media coverage, it is now widely believed that pets enhance their owners’ health, sense of psychological well-being, and longevity. But while some researchers have reported that positive effects accrue from interacting with animals, others have found that the health and happiness of pet owners is no better, and in some cases worse, than that of non–pet owners. I discuss some reasons why studies of the effects of pets on people have produced conflicting results, and I argue that the existence of a generalized “pet effect” on human mental and physical health is at present not a fact but an unsubstantiated hypothesis.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Some authors doubt the generalized pet-effect on human mental and physical health because of conflicting results and lack of publication of negative results.
“Some authors doubt the generalized pet-effect on human mental and physical health because of conflicting results that are prevalent in this area of science and the lack of publication of negative results [13,104,105,106].”
From A One Health Perspective on the Human-Companion Animal Relationship with Emphasis on Zoonotic Aspects. (2020) · cites this paper as [105]
Cites
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 · Cited by 10,505 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Overgaauw, P. A. M., Vinke, C. M., van Hagen, M. A. E., & Lipman, L. J. A. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17113789 · Cited by 301 · see citing works
Companion Animals and Child/Adolescent Development: A Systematic Review of the Evidence
Purewal, R., Christley, R., Kordas, K., Joinson, C., Meints, K., Gee, N., & Westgarth, C. (2017) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph14030234 · Cited by 302 · see citing works
The Benefit of Pets and Animal-Assisted Therapy to the Health of Older Individuals
Cherniack, E. P., & Cherniack, A. R. (2014) · Current Gerontology and Geriatrics Research · doi:10.1155/2014/623203 · Cited by 159 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
Pet Ownership in Aotearoa New Zealand: A National Survey of Cat and Dog Owner Practices
Forrest, R., Awawdeh, L., Pearson, M., & Waran, N. (2023) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani13040631 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
- Authors
- Herzog, H.
- Affiliations
- Western Carolina University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Herzog, Harold
- Venue
- Current Directions in Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2011-08
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 236-239
- ISSN
- 0963-7214 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-8721
- OpenAlex
- W2111829043
- Cited by
- 514
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 29 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 51 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 90 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 8.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Current Directions in Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Urban Green Space and Health
- Keywords
- PET, human-animal interaction, pet owners, psychological well-being, physical health, longevity, conflicting research findings
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
