ANTHROZOÖS
VOLUME 26, ISSUE 2 PP. 295–305
REPRINTS AVAILABLE DIRECTLY FROM THE PUBLISHERS
PHOTOCOPYING PERMITTED BY LICENSE ONLY
© ISAZ 2013 PRINTED IN THE UK
Pet Ownership, Other Domestic Relationships, and Satisfaction with Life among Seniors: Results from a Canadian National Survey Chelsea G. Himsworth*† and Melanie Rock‡
School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada †Animal Health Centre, British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture, Abbotsford, British Columbia, Canada ‡Population Health Intervention Research Centre, Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada ABSTRACT Given unprecedented aging in the global population along with the physical and psychological challenges associated with aging, it is important to identify ways to protect and promote quality of life for seniors. Previous research has suggested that pet ownership may confer a variety of health and social benefits among seniors. The purpose of this analysis was to determine whether pet ownership was associated with satisfaction with life among Canadian seniors. Quantitative data were obtained from the Canadian Community Health Survey—Healthy Aging, a nationally representative survey of Canadians ≥ 45 years of age conducted between December 2008 and November 2009. Analyses were restricted to a subsample of 11,973 individuals ≥ 65 years of age, and multiple logistic regression was used to model the relationship between pet ownership and satisfaction with life while controlling for sociodemographic factors. The final model was stratified to detect interaction. Pet ownership was negatively correlated with satisfaction with life in the sample as a whole (AOR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.72–0.87) and among those who were married, in common-law relationships, and/or lived with others, while no association was found among those who were widowed, single, or living alone. Among those who were both divorced and living alone, pet ownership demonstrated the potential for being associated with greater satisfaction with life (AOR = 1.24, 95% CI = 0.89–1.73). Overall, this analysis showed that the relationship between seniors and their pets is complex. Whether pet ownership correlates with satisfaction with life appears to depend on the presence and nature of other domestic relationships.
295
Address for correspondence: Chelsea G. Himsworth, Animal Health Centre, British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture, 1767 Angus Campbell Road, Abbotsford, British Columbia, V3G 2M3, Canada. E-mail:
[email protected]
Anthrozoös DOI: 10.2752/175303713X13636846944448
*
Pet Ownership, Other Domestic Relationships, and Satisfaction with Life among Seniors
Keywords: companion animals, pet ownership, pets, satisfaction with life, seniors Over the last half century, global declines in fertility and mortality have led to unprecedented population aging. In fact, the ratio of people ≥ 65 years of age increased from 1 in 20 in 1950 to 1 in 14 in 2000 (United Nations 2002). This trend is expected to continue. By 2050, it is projected that 1 in 6 people (16.7% of the global population) will be ≥ 65 years of age and that the sub-population aged 60 years and older will be growing 3.5 times faster than the total population (United Nations 2002). This “demographic transition” is particularly pronounced in developed countries, such as Canada, where seniors (i.e., those ≥ 65 years) are expected to comprise 24.5% of the population as soon as 2036 (Turcotte and Schellenberg 2007). The aging process is accompanied by a unique set of challenges that can negatively affect quality of life (Bourque et al. 2005; Paskulin and Molzahn 2007; Turcotte and Schellenberg 2007). These challenges include physical limitations, cognitive impairment, development of chronic conditions, loss of independence, and decreased integration into society (Roos and Havens 1991; Bourque et al. 2005; Turcotte and Schellenberg 2007). Given the increasing number of seniors and the challenges that they face, it is vitally important to identify factors related to good quality of life in old age. Previous research has identified a number of factors that affect quality of life in seniors. These include marital status, living arrangements, income, education, and social support (Bourque et al. 2005; Paskulin and Molzahn 2007; Turcotte and Schellenberg 2007). Interactions with companion animals, however, are an oft-neglected but potentially significant source of physical and psychological benefit for a variety of demographic groups, including seniors (McNicholas et al. 2005; Toohey and Rock 2011). Studies focusing on seniors have linked contact with animals, via pet ownership or animal-assisted therapy, with better morale, physical, function, social engagement, and self care, and less loneliness, depression, and anxiety (Jorgenson 1997; Brodie and Biley 1999; Raina et al. 1999; Colombo et al. 2006; Banks, Willoughby and Banks 2008). Direct contact with animals may also buffer the negative effects of stress and lack of social support, and even facilitate connections with other people (Jorgenson 1997; Brodie and Biley 1999; Raina et al. 1999; Colombo et al. 2006; Banks, Willoughby and Banks 2008). The potentially detrimental aspects of pet ownership, however, should not be ignored, and may include the added burden of caring for a pet, allergies related to the pet, and the emotional consequences of pet death (Boldt and Dellmann-Jenkins 1992; Adams, Bonnett and Meek 1999; McNicholas et al. 2005). The few population-based, cross-sectional and longitudinal studies of relationships between pet ownership and quality of life have yielded mixed results, with some showing clear benefits and others showing no or negative associations (Ory and Goldberg 1983; Raina et al. 1999; Pachana et al. 2005; Parslow et al. 2005; Headey and Grabka 2007). Additionally, although these studies measured a variety of health outcomes, including depression, anxiety, affect, physical function, mental health, and healthcare utilization (Ory and Goldberg 1983; Raina et al. 1999; Pachana et al. 2005; Parslow et al. 2005; Headey and Grabka 2007), none examined the relationship between pet ownership and satisfaction with life. Satisfaction with life, an important aspect of quality of life (Paskulin and Molzahn 2007), reflects an individual’s subjective assessment of their own well-being (Pavot et al. 1991; Pavot and Diener 1993). It has several advantages over other quality of life measures in that: 1) it is a global measure, requiring the individual to reflect upon their quality of life as a whole; 2) it seeks to account for
296
Anthrozoös
❖
Himsworth and Rock
individual variation in perceptions, standards, and values regarding the factors that contribute to quality of life; and 3) it provides equal consideration to both positive and negative outcomes (Pavot et al. 1991; Pavot and Diener 1993). The purpose of this study was to determine whether pet ownership significantly improves satisfaction with life in a nationally-representative sample of Canadian seniors. To our knowledge, this study is the first to examine the relationship between pet ownership and quality of life in a national sample of Canadians. Furthermore, to our knowledge, this study is the first anywhere in the world to examine the relationship between pet ownership and scores on a satisfaction with life scale.
Methods Data Source and Study Sample Data were obtained from the Canadian Community Health Survey—Healthy Aging (CCHS-HA), a cross-sectional survey conducted by Statistics Canada between December 2008 and November 2009 that collected information on factors that influence healthy aging in Canadians ≥ 45 years of age living in private dwellings in Canada’s ten provinces (Statistics Canada 2010). Individuals living in Canada’s three territories, on Indian reserves, on Crown lands, or in institutions were excluded from the sampling frame, as were full-time armed forces members and residents of some remote regions (Statistics Canada 2010). The CCHS-HA utilized a stratified multistage cluster design for sample selection. Ultimately, data were collected from a total of 30,865 individuals, representing an overall response rate of 74.4% (Statistics Canada 2010).
Covariates Covariates that were considered included age, sex, marital status, household size, housing type, level of education, total household income, area of residence, chronic conditions, and ethnicity (see Table 1 for details). The first nine variables were included because previous research has indicated that they may confound the relationship between pet ownership and a
297
The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SLS) is a validated measure of global life satisfaction that shows good construct validity, high internal consistency, and convergent validity with other assessments of subjective well-being (Pavot et al. 1991; Pavot and Diener 1993). The SLS demonstrates temporal stability (i.e., is not overly swayed by immediate factors such as mood) but is sufficiently sensitive to detect the impact of medium-term events and circumstances on life satisfaction (Pavot et al. 1991; Pavot and Diener 1993). The SLS is based on a fiveitem questionnaire with the respondent being asked to agree or disagree with each statement using a seven-point scale (Diener et al. 1985). The SLS score is created through the summation of scores from the five items and has a range of 5 to 35, with higher scores indicating greater satisfaction with life (Diener et al. 1985). The score can subsequently be divided into categories (ranging from “extremely satisfied” to “extremely dissatisfied”) for easier interpretation (Statistics Canada 2011a). Within this sample of individuals, distribution of SLS scores was markedly skewed, with 74.1% of respondents having a SLS score of between 26 and 35 (corresponding to the categories “satisfied” and “extremely satisfied”). For this reason, SLS score was dichotomized into “satisfied with life” (score of 26–35) and “not satisfied with life” (score of 5–25). This dichotomous variable was used as the outcome. The explanatory variable was currently having a household pet that provides companionship (yes/no).
Anthrozoös
Explanatory and Outcome Variables
Pet Ownership, Other Domestic Relationships, and Satisfaction with Life among Seniors
Table 1. Baseline characteristics and bivariable associations with pet ownership among Canadian Seniors (aged ! 65 years). Pet Owner
298
Anthrozoös
Characteristic
Frequency (n = 11,973)
%a
Age (years) 65–69 70–74 75–79 80–84 ≥ 85
3156 2323 2202 1670 2622
32.0 25.5 19.6 13.4 9.6
41.4 25.5 15.9 10.6 6.8
28.5 25.6 20.9 14.4 10.7
Sex Female Male
6857 5116
52.6 47.4
52.1 47.9
52.8 47.2
Education < Secondary Secondary graduate Some post-secondary Post-secondary graduate
5216 1652 551 4554
39.6 15.4 4.7 40.2
41.0 14.3 5.2 39.4
39.1 15.9 4.6 40.5
Household Income < $20,000 $20,000–$39,999 $40,000–$59,999 $60,000–$79,999 ≥ $80,000
2941 4519 2232 1066 1215
16.6 36.4 21.5 11.2 14.3
14.4 39.2 20.0 11.6 14.8
17.4 35.3 22.1 11.1 14.1
Marital Status Married/common law Widowed Divorced Single
5703 4574 1118 578
64.4 23.8 8.0 3.8
64.0 23.0 9.4 3.6
64.5 24.1 7.5 3.8
Household Size Does not live alone Lives alone
6458 5515
70.0 30.0
73.8 26.2
68.2 31.4
Housing Typec Detached house Apartment Other
7475 2853 1643
62.9 23.3 13.8
73.2 12.5 14.3
59.2 27.3 13.6
Area of Residence Urban Non-urban
6467 5506
61.4 38.6
54.2 45.8
64.1 35.9
Ethnicityc White Non-white
11121 819
91.3 8.4
94.7 4.9
90.1 9.7
Chronic Conditionsc No chronic conditions ≥ 1 chronic conditions
882 10913
8.5 90.1
7.1 91.4
9.0 89.7
continued…
Yes %a (n = 3,096)
No %a (n = 8,877)
!2
pb
217.16
< 0.0001
0.47
0.4900
8.75
0.0300
27.90
< 0.0001
12.94
0.0050
29.65
< 0.0001
293.36
< 0.0001
97.12
< 0.0001
74.20
< 0.0001
11.50
0.0030
Himsworth and Rock
Table 1. continued… Pet Owner Characteristic
Frequency (n = 11,973)
%a
Yes %a (n = 3,096)
No %a (n = 8,877)
Satisfaction with Life Scale Classification (SLS Score) Extremely satisfied (≥ 31) Satisfied (26–30) Slightly satisfied (21–25) Neutral (20) Slightly dissatisfied (15–19) Dissatisfied (10–14) Extremely dissatisfied (≤10)
2572 6301 1749 237 687 337 90
21.5 52.6 14.6 1.9 5.7 2.8 0.8
21.8 51.6 13.4 2.0 5.9 4.3 0.9
25.3 52.3 13.0 1.6 4.9 2.1 0.8
Satisfaction with Life (Dichotomized) Satisfied with life Not satisfied with life
8873 3100
74.1 25.9
73.4 26.6
77.6 22.4
!2
pb
68.84
< 0.0001
22.66
< 0.0001
All percentages are weighted to account for CCHS-HA probability sampling. Values may not add up because of rounding.
a
Determined using Pearson’s chi-squared test for the difference between pet owners and non-pet owners.
b
Individuals with missing responses excluded. Excluded individuals comprised < 1.5% of total responses.
c
variety of health outcomes (Raina et al. 1999; Pachana et al. 2005; Headey and Grabka 2007). Ethnicity was included because this variable plausibly could act as an important confounder.
299
To identify characteristics associated with pet ownership, the distribution of the dependent variable and covariates was examined among the sample as a whole, as well as separately for pet owners and non-pet owners. Logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between the outcome and explanatory variables, as well as each of the covariates; first in a bivariable manner and subsequently in a multivariable model. Age, sex, education, and income were forced into the multivariable regression model to control for these conceptually important socio-demographic variables. Subsequently, changes in the relationship between the explanatory and outcome variables (i.e., changes in the point estimate for the odds of being satisfied versus not satisfied in pet owners versus non-pet owners) were examined while adding and removing remaining covariates in a stepwise manner. A covariate was considered to be a significant confounder if it altered the point estimate by ≥ 10%, and only significant confounders were retained in the final model. Spearman’s rank correlation was used to confirm that none of the variables included in the final model were strongly collinear, and the model was stratified to evaluate interactions among the explanatory variable and covariates. The final analytic sample was generated by excluding individuals with missing responses for one or more of the covariates or effect modifiers included in the main model or sub-analyses. Multivariable logistic regression for the relationship between pet ownership and satisfaction with life controlling for age and sex was repeated on the total sample (i.e., the final analytic sub-sample and the excluded individuals) to determine if the exclusion of these individuals had the potential to bias the final model. Probability weights were applied to all analyses in order to account for the unequal probability of an individual being sampled using the methodology
Anthrozoös
Statistical Analysis
Pet Ownership, Other Domestic Relationships, and Satisfaction with Life among Seniors
Table 2. Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for being “satisfied with life” in Canadian seniors. Unadjusted
Adjusted
Characteristic
OR
95% CI
OR
95% CI
Pet Ownership No Yes
Ref 0.80
0.73–0.88
0.79
0.72–0.87
Age (years) 65–69 70–74 75–79 80–84 ≥ 85
Ref 0.92 1.00 0.96 1.00
0.82–1.02 0.88–1.13 0.84–1.11 0.86–1.17
0.96 1.06 1.05 1.20
0.86–1.08 0.94–1.21 0.91–1.21 1.02–1.41
Sex Female Male
Ref 1.31
1.20–1.42
1.14
1.04–1.25
Education < Secondary Secondary graduate Some post-secondary Post-secondary graduate
Ref 1.14 1.26 1.32
1.01–1.29 1.02–1.55 1.21–1.46
0.97 1.04 1.02
0.86–1.11 0.84–1.29 0.92–1.13
Household Income < $20,000 $20,000–$39,999 $40,000–$59,999 $60,000–$79,999 ≥ $80,000
Ref 1.64 2.11 2.94 2.92
1.46–1.84 1.85–2.40 2.48–3.50 2.49–3.42
1.65 2.09 2.93 2.88
1.47–1.85 1.82–2.40 2.45–3.51 2.43–3.40
employed by the CCHS-HA (Statistics Canada 2011c). Statistical analyses were completed using SAS (Version 9.3; SAS Institute, Inc, Cary, NC). Although the classification system for satisfaction with life recommended by Pavot and Diener (1993) is intuitively appealing and easy to interpret, we wished to conduct a sensitivity analysis to determine how an alternate classification of SLS score would influence the analysis. For this reason we created a second variable representing satisfaction with life by dichotomizing SLS at the median value for the study sample (SLS = 29). For this variable, any individual with a SLS ≥ 29 (55.2% of individuals) was considered “satisfied” and any individual with a SLS score < 29 (44.8% of individuals) was considered “not satisfied.” The aforementioned models were re-run using this alternative classification for satisfaction with life.
300
Anthrozoös
Results The initial analytic sample was composed of 14,945 individuals aged ≥ 65 years who provided valid responses to the question “Do you have a household pet that provides you with companionship?” and to questions pertaining to the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SLS) (Statistics Canada 2011b). After excluding all individuals with missing responses for education, income, household size, and marital status [n = 2,972] (see below), the final analytic sample consisted of 11,973 people. Results described below pertain to this sample unless otherwise indicated. Among this sample of seniors (Table 1), the majority were married or in common-law relationships, living with at least one other person in a single detached house located in an
Himsworth and Rock
Table 3. Adjusted odds ratios (AOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for being “satisfied with life” in Canadian seniors stratified by household size and/or marital status. Stratification Variable(s)
Group
n
Adjusted ORa
95% CI
Household Size
Lives alone Does not live alone
5515 6458
1.00 0.70
0.85–1.19 0.62–0.78
Marital Status
Married/common law Widowed Divorced Single
5703 4574 1118 578
0.74 0.89 0.97 0.71
0.65–0.84 0.74–1.07 0.73–1.30 0.45–1.14
Household Size and Marital Status
Alone and divorced Not alone and divorcedb Alone and not divorced Not alone and not divorcedb
975 143 4540 6315
1.24 0.56 0.93 0.72
0.89–1.73 0.26–1.20 0.76–1.13 0.64–0.81
Odds ratio for being satisfied with life in pet owners vs. non-owners adjusted for age, sex, education, and income.
a
Includes individuals who were married/common law, widowed, and single.
301
urban area. The proportion of people living alone was 1.8% among those who reported being married or in common-law relationships, 80.7% among those who reported being widowed, 84.9% among those who reported being divorced, and 73.7% among those who reported being single. Over 90% of individuals self-identified as white and reported having one or more chronic conditions. The majority (53%) reported a total household income ≤ $39,999 CAD, while only 14.3% of individuals had a total household income ≥ $80,000. Approximately 40% reported not having graduated from high school, while approximately 40% identified themselves as post-secondary graduates. Overall, 26.8% of seniors reported having a household pet that provided them with companionship and 73.2% did not. Compared with those without companion animals in the home, pet owners were more likely to be younger, to live with at least one other person, to dwell in a single detached house, to reside in a non-urban area, to self-identify as white, and to report having at least one chronic condition (Table 1). The association between pet ownership, education, and marital status was less clear; however, pet owners were slightly more likely to be divorced compared with non-owners. There was no association between pet ownership and sex. Within the sample as a whole, 74.1% of seniors were classified as being “satisfied with life.” Nevertheless, pet owners were less likely to be classified as being “satisfied with life” compared with non-pet owners (Table 1). On bivariable analysis (Table 2), the odds of being “satisfied with life” were 20% less in pet owners compared with non-owners. When incorporated into a multivariable model, none of the covariates considered were significant confounders of the relationship between pet ownership and satisfaction with life (i.e., the odds of being satisfied versus not satisfied in pet owners versus non-pet owners did not change by more than 4% with the addition or removal of one or more covariates). Age, sex, education, and household income were forced into the final model; however, all other covariates were excluded. Upon stratifying the final model by living arrangement, among people who did not live alone, pet owners had a 30% lower odds of being satisfied with life compared with non-owners (Table 3). Among people who lived alone, however, pet ownership was not associated with satisfaction with life. Effect modification was also evident after stratifying by marital status. Among those who
Anthrozoös
b
Pet Ownership, Other Domestic Relationships, and Satisfaction with Life among Seniors
were married or in common-law relationships, pet ownership was associated with a 26% lower odds of being satisfied. Meanwhile, no association was found between pet ownership and satisfaction with life among those who were divorced, widowed, or single (Table 3). When the final model was stratified by both household size and marital status, a threeway interaction was apparent. This interaction was particularly pronounced when divorced people were analyzed separately from those who were married or in common-law relationships, widowed, or single (with the latter categories being merged into one). For example, among those who were not divorced and were living with other people, the odds of being satisfied were 28% less in pet owners than in non-owners. By contrast, among those who were divorced and living alone, the odds of being satisfied were 24% greater in pet owners than in non-owners (Table 3). Among the 2,972 individuals excluded from the final model due to missing data for sociodemographic covariates (i.e., age, sex, income, and education), the distribution of the explanatory and outcome variables were similar to that of the analytic sample (data not shown). Re-introduction of excluded individuals into the model (controlling for age and sex, for which all individuals had valid responses) did not change the relationship between pet ownership and satisfaction with life (AOR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.73–0.86). With regard to the sensitivity analysis, the use of an alternate classification for satisfaction with life (i.e., by dichotomizing SLS score at the median) did not significantly change the results of the primary or sub-analyses. Although the adjusted odds ratio for being satisfied with life among pet owners vs. not pet owners shifted toward the null hypothesis (AOR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.84–1.00), among those who were divorced and alone, the odds of being satisfied with life among pet owners vs. not pet owners was magnified (AOR = 1.33, 95% CI = 0.96–1.86).
302
Anthrozoös
Discussion Overall, this analysis showed that the relationship between seniors and their pets is complex. Satisfaction with life among pet owners appears to depend on the other domestic relationships in which those seniors are involved. For example, for individuals who were married/in commonlaw relationships, or living with others, pet ownership was associated with a decreased odds of being satisfied with life, whereas among those who were both divorced and living alone, pet ownership was associated with an increased odds of being satisfied with life. There was no association between pet ownership and satisfaction with life among those who lived alone, were widowed, or were single. Despite the strengths of this study (among them the large, nationally representative sample which facilitates generalizability), there are several limitations that warrant note. One such limitation is the question from which the explanatory variable was generated (i.e., “Do you have a household pet that provides you with companionship?”), which is the only question concerning pets in any of the Canadian Community Health Surveys. Although this question implies some level of involvement above mere ownership, it does not account for the quality of attachment, the species of the pet, or the duration of pet ownership, all of which may influence the relationship between pet ownership and health outcomes (Garrity et al. 1989; Friedmann and Thomas 1995; Stammbach and Turner 1999; Headey and Grabka 2007). Additionally, given that this study is a secondary analysis of a pre-existing national health dataset, it is not possible to glean any more information regarding the relationship between respondents and their pets. Some studies, however, have found that
303
these factors do not alter the relationship between pet ownership and physical/mental health (Raina et al. 1999; Turner, Rieger and Gygax 2003; Pachana et al. 2005; Winefield, Black and Chur-Hansen 2008). An additional limitation may lie in the nature of the outcome variable, as the SLS is a measure of the cognitive rather than the affective aspects of an individual’s subjective well-being (Pavot and Diener 1993), and may not accurately capture the emotional benefits of pet ownership. With regard to the overall analysis, three things were of particular note: 1) education, income, and other factors previously thought to confound the relationship between pet ownership and health outcomes (Raina et al. 1999; Pachana et al. 2005; Headey and Grabka 2007) were not found to be confounders in our analysis; 2) two of the factors previously viewed as confounders were in fact found to be effect modifiers; and 3) these two effect modifiers factors (i.e., marital status and household size) were both a reflection of domestic relationships other than with household pets. Complexity in the relationship between pet ownership and satisfaction with life ought not to be surprising. Owning a pet, unlike owning a physical object, requires relational interaction, with all the negatives and positives that such relationships bring. In congruence with this suggestion, Parslow et al. (2005) found that, among Australians aged 60–64 who were married or in a relationship, owning or caring for a pet was associated with decreased physical health, while no such relationship was present among those who were not married or in a relationship. Mirroring this effect, Goldmeier (1986) found that, among elderly women living alone, pet ownership was associated with less dissatisfaction but that this effect was not apparent when other people were present in the household (Goldmeier 1986). As well, it has been found that people who were divorced, who lived alone, or both were more attached to and received more emotional support from their pets compared with people who were married, living with others, or both (Poresky and Daniels 1998; Stammbach and Turner 1999). Compared with people who did not live alone, unmarried adults living alone were also more likely to report that they owned a pet to decrease loneliness and help them through hard times (Staats, Sears and Pierfelice 2006). What was of particular interest in the present study was that the increased odds of being satisfied as a function of pet ownership was found only in divorced people living alone, rather than in people living alone in general. Although the 95% confidence interval for this relationship includes the null hypothesis, the size and range of that interval suggests that this positive relationship may, indeed, be present. This finding may suggest that how we value our interactions with our pets is not simply a function of the complexity of relationships in which we are presently involved, but, as well, is influenced by those in which we have hitherto been a part (along with the negative and positive consequences of those relationships). Speaking to this particular issue, a previous study has shown that pet ownership may buffer the consequences of stressful life situations, such as being divorced (Siegel 1990). The cross-sectional nature of this study precludes the determination of causal relationships between satisfaction with life, pet ownership, marital status, and household size. Our results do, however, lend credence to previous assertions that pets are not a panacea for deteriorating quality of life in seniors (Boldt and Dellmann-Jenkins 1992) and suggest that future quantitative and qualitative research should focus on the dynamic interplay among seniors, their pets, and other domestic relationships.
Anthrozoös
Himsworth and Rock
Pet Ownership, Other Domestic Relationships, and Satisfaction with Life among Seniors
304
Anthrozoös
References
Adams, C. L., Bonnett, B. N. and Meek, A. H. 1999. Owner response to companion animal death: Development of a theory and practical implications. The Canadian Veterinary Journal 40: 33–39. Banks, M. R., Willoughby, L. M. and Banks, W. A. 2008. Animal-assisted therapy and loneliness in nursing homes: Use of robotic versus living dogs. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association 9: 173–177. Boldt, M. A. and Dellmann-Jenkins, M. 1992. The impact of companion animals in later life and considerations for practice. Journal of Applied Gerontology 11: 228–239. Bourque, P., Pushkar, D., Bonneville, L. and Béland, F. 2005. Contextual effects on life satisfaction of older men and women. Canadian Journal on Aging 24: 31–44. Brodie, S. J. and Biley, F. C. 1999. An exploration of the potential benefits of pet facilitated therapy. Journal of Clinical Nursing 8: 329–337. Colombo, G., Buono, M. D., Smania, K., Raviola, R. and De Leo, D. 2006. Pet therapy and institutionalized elderly: A study on 144 cognitively unimpaired subjects. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics 42: 207– 216. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J. and Griffin, S. 1985. The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment 49: 71–75. Friedmann, E. and Thomas, S. A. 1995. Pet ownership, social support, and one-year survival after acute myocardial infarction in the cardiac arrhythmia suppression trial (CAST). The American Journal of Cardiology 76: 1213–1217. Garrity, T. F., Stallones, L., Marx, M. B. and Johnson, T. P. 1989. Pet ownership and attachment as supportive factors in the health of the elderly. Anthrozoös 3: 35–44. Goldmeier, J. 1986. Pets or people: Another research note. The Gerontologist 26: 203–206. Headey, B. and Grabka, M. M. 2007. Pets and human health in Germany and Australia: National longitudinal results. Social Indicators Research 80: 297–311. Jorgenson, J. 1997. Therapeutic use of companion animals in health care. Journal of Nursing Scholarship 29: 249–254. McNicholas, J., Gilbey, A., Rennie, A., Ahmedzai, S., Dono, J. A. and Ormerod, E. 2005. Pet ownership and human health: A brief review of evidence and issues. British Medical Journal 331: 1252. Ory, M. G. and Goldberg, E. L. 1983. Pet possession and well-being in elderly women. Research on Aging 5: 389–409. Pachana, N. A., Ford, J. H., Andrew, B. and Dobson, A. J. 2005. Relations between companion animals and self-reported health in older women: Cause, effect or artifact? International Journal of Behavioral Medicine 12: 103–110. Parslow, R. A., Jorm, A. F., Rodgers, H. C. B. and Jacomb, P. 2005. Pet ownership and health in older adults: Findings from a survey of 2,551 community-based Australians aged 60–64. Gerontology 51: 40–47. Paskulin, L. M. G. and Molzahn, A. 2007. Quality of life of older adults in Canada and Brazil. Western Journal of Nursing Research 29: 10–26. Pavot, W. and Diener, E. 1993. Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological Assessment 5: 164–172. Pavot, W. G., Diener, E., Colvin, C. R. and Sandvik, E. 1991. Further validation of the satisfaction with life scale: Evidence for the cross-method convergence of well-being measures. Journal of Personality Assessment 57: 149–161. Poresky, R. H. and Daniels, A. M. 1998. Demographics of pet presence and attachment. Anthrozoös 11: 236–241. Raina, P., Waltner-Toews, D., Bonnett, B., Woodward, C. and Abernathy, T. 1999. Influence of companion animals on the physical and psychological health of older people: An analysis of a one-year longitudinal study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 47: 323–329. Roos, N. P. and Havens, B. 1991. Predictors of successful aging: A twelve-year study of Manitoba elderly. American Journal of Public Health 81: 63–68. Siegel, J. M. 1990. Stressful life events and use of physician services among the elderly: The moderating role of pet ownership. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 58: 1081–1086. Staats, S., Sears, K. and Pierfelice, L. 2006. Teachers’ pets and why they have them: An investigation of the human–animal bond. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 36: 1881–1891. Stammbach, K. B. and Turner, D. C. 1999. Understanding the human–cat relationship: Human social support or attachment. Anthrozoös 12: 162–168. Statistics Canada. 2010. Canadian Community Health Survey—Healthy Aging (CCHS). www.statcan.gc.ca. Accessed on October 27, 2011.
Himsworth and Rock
305
Anthrozoös
Statistics Canada. 2011a. Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS)—Healthy Aging: Derived and grouped variables. http://hdl.handle.net/10573/42493. Accessed on October 27, 2011. Statistics Canada. 2011b. Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS)—Healthy Aging: Questionnaire. http://hdl.handle.net.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10573/42493. Accessed on October 27, 2011. Statistics Canada. 2011c. Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS)—Healthy Aging: User guide. http://hdl.handle.net.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10573/42493. Accessed on October 27, 2011. Toohey, A. M. and Rock, M. J. 2011. Unleashing their potential: A critical realist scoping review of the influence of dogs on physical activity for dog-owners and non-owners. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 8: 46. Turcotte, M. and Schellenberg, G. 2007. A portrait of seniors in Canada. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/adsannonces/89-519-x/index-eng.htm. Accessed on October 18, 2011. Turner, D. C., Rieger, G. and Gygax, L. 2003. Spouses and cats and their effects on human mood. Anthrozoös 16: 213–228. United Nations. 2002. World population ageing: 1950–2050. http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/ worldageing19502050/. Accessed on December 2, 2011. Winefield, H. R., Black, A. and Chur-Hansen, A. 2008. Health effects of ownership of and attachment to companion animals in an older population. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine 15: 303–310.
