Cited by 174Human-Animal Interaction StudiesAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesAnimal Law and Welfare

Returning a Recently Adopted Companion Animal: Adopters' Reasons for and Reactions to the Failed Adoption Experience

Shore, Elsie R.·2005·Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science

Abstract

The return of a recently adopted companion animal places the nonhuman animal in jeopardy and may be painful and frustrating to the humans involved. However, if returners learn from the failed adoption experience, future adoptions may be more satisfactory for all concerned. In this study, 78 people who had adopted and returned dogs or cats to an animal shelter in a U.S. Midwestern city were interviewed regarding their reasons for return, reactions to the experience, and plans for future adoptions. Although some returners adjusted their pet ownership plans in potentially beneficial ways, most reacted by counseling greater forethought and planning before adopting. The last, although sound advice, had little to do with reasons for return, which primarily were problems that arose postadoption: pet behavior such as not getting along with other pets or children. Changing expectations about the development of new pet-family relationships and the provision of postadoption services might help adopters tolerate the adjustment period and handle problems without resorting to returning the animal.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/s15327604jaws0803_3

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shore, E. R.
Affiliations
Wichita State University (US)
Corresponding author
Shore, Elsie R.
Venue
Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science
Published
2005-07
Volume
8
Issue
3
Pages
187-198
ISSN
  • 1088-8705 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7604
OpenAlex
W2134223240
Cited by
174
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 11 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Holmes Museum Of Anthropology (Wichita State University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal Behavior and Welfare Studies
  • Social Sciences › Law › Animal Law and Welfare
Keywords
dogs, cats, animal shelters, pet behavior, human-animal relations, pet ownership
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Aged, Animals, Animal Husbandry, Animal Welfare, Animals, Domestic, Behavior, Animal, Human-Animal Bond, Cats, Dogs, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Middle Aged, Ownership

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