See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/331177565

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND

PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING

Article · February 2019

CITATIONS READS

0 3,176

3 authors:

Aslı Azanpa Talita Hamur

Yeditepe University Bogazici University
1 PUBLICATION 0 CITATIONS 1 PUBLICATION 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Kübra Kahraman
Bogazici University
1 PUBLICATION 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Aslı Azanpa on 18 February 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Running Head: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND

PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING

Aslı AZANPA, Talita HAMUR, Kübra KAHRAMAN

Boğaziçi University, Faculty of Education

Abstract

The purpose of this descriptive study is to examine the relationship between human-pet

attachment and perceived stress level. Human-pet attachment is a strong emotional bond and

close relationship between people and their pets. The significance of this study is that the

important findings on human-pet attachment and perceived stress may help people to

overcome their stress with the help of pets and people can be encouraged to have pets to

reduce their stress levels which especially stem from their school and work conditions. The

study was investigated in 414 people in the community. Participants who do not have pet

completed Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) and participants who have pet completed both PSS

and Lexington Attachment to Pets Scale (LAPS). Pet owners have lower stress level than

non-pet owners and there is no relationship between pet owners’ stress level and attachment

level.

Keywords: Stress, human-animal interaction, attachment, pet

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 1

Introduction

We realized that a lot of students in our university have pets and have a strong liking for

pets. They share their pets’ pictures and receive hundreds of comments or ask questions

about them and get plenty of feedbacks in Boğaziçi Buddy Group on Facebook. We are

fascinated by students’ attitudes about pets and we wondered why so many people have

pets. We thought that these people should have some reasons to own a pet. From this point,

many questions crossed our minds. One of them was ‘Is there any reason for owning a pet or

people just love and would like to pet them’. In the light of those questions, we reviewed the

literature and found that many scholars like Beetz and Bales (2016) argued that there is a

strong emotional bond between pet owners and their pets. Also, in their study, Gee, Hurley,

and Rawlings (2016) concluded that pet owners may have lower stress levels than people

who do not have the animal attachment. Human-animal attachment is seen beneficial for

psychological well-being according to our literature review, but a more comprehensive

study is needed to understand that, pet owners always have less stress level than others or

people feel more stressful when they have a strong emotional bond between themselves and

their pets.

The purpose of this descriptive study is to examine the relationship between human-pet

attachment and psychological well-being. Human-pet attachment is a strong emotional bond

and close relationship between people and their pets. Participants are non-pet owners and

pet owners regardless of their pet type. In the first phase of this study, participants’

demographic information (gender, age, marital status, educational status, the number of

children) and personal information (past experiences about pets, which type of pet they

have, how many years they have been owning a pet, who is responsible for the daily care)

are collected. In the second phase, with Perceived Stress Scale participants’ stress levels
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 2

during the last month are examined. In the third phase, pet owners completed Lexington

Attachment to Pets Scale (LAPS). The results of this study can be used in psychological

services especially for people suffering from pet loss and/or in hospitals for children with

special needs. The findings of this study will redound to the benefit of people with high-

stress levels considering the adverse effects of stress load on people’s lives. The significance

of this study is that the important findings on human health and well-being will help them to

overcome stress with pets and people can be encouraged to have pets to reduce their stress

levels which especially stem from their school and work conditions. The administrative of

school or workplaces may allow students or employees to have a pet in their dormitories,

campuses or workplaces.

Literature Review

Human-animal attachment is a study for many scholars who try to understand the

relationship between pet owners and their well-being. Sable (1995) stated family pets,

especially cats and dogs, present absolute factors of attachment that provide emotional and

social well-being during the whole life cycle. He also stated that during stressful

changeovers like divorce, pet may help to reduce stress level and feeling of loneliness.

These findings are significant for people who feel pressure on them and because of that have

high stress in their life. If having a pet may reduce the level of stress in people’s lives,

people may try to spend time with animals more often than they do. Sable is not the only

scholar who studied pet owners and their well-being. Jennings (1997) also indicated that

having a pet may improve pet owners’ health not only emotional and social well-being but

also physical and mental health. Beside Sable (1995), Jennings’s (1997) findings presented

that owning a pet might improve mental health of people who suffer from mental disorders.

In addition, Jennings (1997) also mentioned that pet owners improve their physical health
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 3

because of increased physical activity. However, there is a significant point that pet owners

may have a healthy life due to having a pet, but if they lose their pet, their health will be

gone or not? Actually, this issue cannot be known because there is no single correct answer

to this question.

It is important to explain that pet owners may have a healthy life but not because they have a

pet. To be more precise, pet owners may not be physically healthy, if they do not walk with

their dog or not play with it. In short, they need to have a strong attachment to their pet.

Hereby, In attachment theory, Bowlby (1958) and Ainsworth (Ainsworth & Bowlby, 1991)

define attachment by observing children and citing previous ethological research. In their

work, Bowlby and Ainsworth observed children’s tie to their mothers, and they concluded

that infants and young children who experience a warm, intimate, and continuous

relationship with their mothers in whom they can find satisfaction and enjoyment grow up

mentally healthy (Bretherton, 1992). By impressing from Bowlby’s studies many scholars

who try to understand the relationship between pet owners and their stress level used

attachment theory in their research.

Strong attachment bonds among pet owners and their pets may be beneficial for improving

pet owners’ health in many aspects, but not always. In another study that has been

conducted by Brown and Katcher (2001) found a moderate, positive relationship between

pet attachment and dissociation. They found this result by using the Pet Attachment

Questionnaire (PAQ) (Stallones, Marx, Garrity, & Johnson, 1991) and the Dissociative

Experiences Scale (DES) (Bernstein & Putnam, 1986). According to findings in the role of

attachment in response to pet loss study which is conducted by Field, Orsini, Gavish&

Packman (2009), researchers explained that grief can be different from one person to other,

and in one context to another one. Many features need to be considered for assessment

regarding pet loss like attachment level between pet owners and their pets or how pet
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 4

owners lose their pet when they old or young. Miltiades and Shearer (2011) conducted a

research to find out the relationship between pet attachment, caring a pet, and depression in

older adults. They used PAQ to measure the attachment level between the adults and their

dogs. In the conclusion of their regression analysis, they found that the higher pet

attachment and widowhood is associated with higher levels of depression, and the capability

to care for the dog and enjoyment with human relationships were associated with lower

levels of depression. From that point, we prefer to make a research about the relationship

between pet ownership and stress level in the cross relationship. We claimed that pet owners

who have strong pet attachment have less stress level than pet owners who have weak pet

attachment. In their study, Beetz and Bales (2016) searched the reason for strong human-

animal attachment in technically dominated world by humans. They received support to

figure out the reasons for this strong emotional bond by examining the attachment theory.

When we completed our literature review about the relationship between pet ownership and

stress level, we came to an idea that pet ownership is important for pet owners if they have a

healthy strong attachment to their pets. Then, our second hypothesis is formed which is pet

owners who have higher attachment level have lower stress level.

Hypothesis & Research Questions

The research hypothesis is based on the research question “Is there any stress level

difference between pet owners and non-pet owners?” On the basis of this question, we

created a hypothesis for our study. Therefore, our hypothesis was ‘People who own at least

one pet have lower stress level than people who do not own a pet’. But then, after we

reviewed the literature in this field, we realized that there is a concept called ‘human-pet

attachment’ and this may also be a factor for people’s perceived stress level. On the other
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 5

hand, the difference between pet owners’ and non-pet owners’ perceived stress level has

been examining and investigating by researchers, yet still has been discussing if there is a

significant relationship or not, or whether the positive impacts of owning a pet overcome the

negative impacts of owning a pet or not. Our research question turned into a narrower

inquiry, which is “Is there a relationship between pet owners’ attachment to their pet and

their stress level?”. In conclusion, our hypothesis for this study is people who attached to

their pets more strongly have lower stress levels than people who attached less. In other

words, people who have a stronger attachment to their pets have lower stress levels than

people who have a weaker attachment to their pets. However, there were still some

hypotheses that we were willing to examine, and these hypotheses include non-pet owners

such as if their stress level is different from pet owners.

Hypothesis 1: There is a difference between pet owners and non-pet owners in their

perceived stress levels. People who own at least one pet have lower stress level than people

who do not own a pet.

Hypothesis 2: Pet owners who have stronger attachment levels to their pets also have lower

perceived stress levels and pet owners who have weaker attachment levels to their pets have

higher stress levels.

Theory & Conceptualisation

In our literature review, we came across often to the attachment theory of Bowlby and

Ainsworth. Attachment is a deep and enduring emotional bond that connects one person to

another person or animal across time and space (Ainsworth, 1973; Bowlby, 1969). Also,

according to Brown and Katcher (1997), people with high levels of pet attachment have a

three times greater chance of having clinical levels of dissociation than those with low pet

attachment. In addition, there is a concept called ‘Human-Animal interaction’ (HAI),

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 6

according to American Veterinary Medical Association human-animal interaction

encompasses any situation where there is an interchange between human(s) and animal(s) at

an individual or cultural level. Also, the human-animal bond (HAB) is one of the constructs

that we will be investigating for this study. The human-animal bond is a mutually beneficial

and dynamic relationship between people and animals that is influenced by behaviors

essential to the health and wellbeing of both. (AVMA, 1998). Perceived stress is the feeling

or thought that an individual has about how much stress they are under at a given point in

time or over a given time period (Phillips, 2013). To measure stress levels and collect data

from participants, Turkish adaptation of the Perceived Stress Scale (AlgılananStresÖlçeği)

will be used for this study. The Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) is a measure of the degree to

which situations in one’s life are appraised as stressful. (Cohen, 1994). Lastly, in order to

demonstrate the strength of pet owners’ attachment, the Turkish version of Lexington

Attachment to Pet Scale (LAPS) will be provided. LAPS is perhaps the most widely used

instrument to assess human emotional attachments to pets and is suitable for both dog and

cat owners (Ramírez et al., 2014).

Method

In the descriptive study of pet-animal attachment and perceived stress study, the hypotheses

are there is a difference between stress level of pet owners and non-pet owners and there is a

negative relationship between pet attachment and stress level. These hypotheses are

measured by Turkish adaptations of Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) and Lexington

Attachment to Pets Scale (LAPS). This descriptive study focuses on comparing groups,

correlation and the survey research methods to obtain data.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 7

Participants

Participants are 414 people who completed an online survey. Social media is administered

to contact with participants. The technique for selection of the participation is convenience

sampling. Participation in this study was on a voluntary basis. Participants can either have a

pet or not. Pet owners must have a pet at least for one month. 312 (75.4%) of participants

were female and 102 (24.6%) were male, with an age range of 16-76. While there are 220

(53.1%) participants who have at least one pet, there are 194 (46.9%) participants who do

not have a pet at that moment. The distribution of animal types is 152 cats (69.1%), 42 dogs

(19.1%), both cats and dogs are 26 (11.8%).

Measures

Descriptive Data. A demographic questionnaire was prepared to gather the following

information: participant's age, participant's gender, the number of children they have (if

any), participant’s educational background and marital status, their past experience with any

pet, the type of pet presently owned, how long they have been owning their pet and who is

mostly responsible for the daily care of pet. Informed consent forms are used including

information about procedures, benefits, and risks of participating, an explanation of how to

acquire the results of the research, voluntary participation, and contact information of the

researchers. The purpose of the study is also on the consent form. Additional materials

contain two self -compiled questionnaires (see appendix).

Perceived Stress Scale

The participants accomplished the 14-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS; Cohen,

Kamarck&Mermelstein, 1983). The PSS was applied to estimate stress levels during the last

month. Participants answer the items such as “In the last month, how often have you been

upset because of something that happened unexpectedly? (See Appendix B for the full PSS)
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 8

on a Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5 (1=never; 2=almost never; 3=sometimes; 4=fairly

often; 5=very often). This scale was modified from the range of 0-4 to 1-5 (Wade, 2017).

Scores ranging from 0-13 indicates low stress; from 14-26 indicates moderate stress; from

27-40 indicates high perceived stress (Cohen et al, 1983). In this study, most of the

participants were Turkish. Therefore, the Turkish adaptation of PSS was administered. The

reliability and validity studies of Turkish Adaptation of PSS which is called Algılanan

Stress Ölçeği (ASÖ) were conducted by Eskin, Harlak, Demirkıran, and Dereboy (2013).

The psychometric properties of the long and short versions of ASÖ were tested (Eskin et al.,

2013). The items 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, and 13 are reverse items, they have to be re-coded. The

internal consistency reliability coefficient for the Turkish versions of the PSS-14 is 0.84. It

means that the adaptation scale is reliable in terms of internal consistency and proper for

using to test the hypothesis (see Appendix C for the full ASÖ).

Lexington Attachment to Pets Scale

Lexington Attachment to Pets Scale (LAPS) was developed by Johnson, Garrity, and

Stallones (1992) to measure the emotional attachment of individuals to the pet. This

questionnaire is a Likert scale in which there are 23 adjective pairs that assess the

attachment level of participants to their pets. The participants are asked to select the number

along with the scale that most closely describes them or their preferences. Each item is

answered on a 4-point response scale (0= I totally disagree, 1= I slightly disagree, 2= I

slightly agree 3= I completely agree). A low score indicates a low attachment level, and a

high score is indicative of a high attachment level to pets. LAPS is appropriate for dog and

cat owners. Participants to the LAPS are asked to demonstrate their level of agreement with

statements such as “I believe that my pet is a part of my family; I share my secrets with my

pet; my pet understands me” (see Appendix E for the full LAPS). Because all respondents
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 9

are Turkish, the Turkish adaptation of LAPS is preferred for this study. The reliability and

validity studies of Turkish Adaptation of LAPS which is called

EvcilHayvanlaraBağlanmaÖlçeği (EHBÖ) are conducted by Karameşe (2014). While the

Cronbach alpha value of the scale was .91, the Cronbach's alpha value for sub-dimensions

was .86 for General Attachment; it was calculated as .78 for Human Substitution and .70 for

Animal Rights (Karameşe, 2014). The total score that can be taken from the scale varies

between 0 and 69. The increase in the score indicates that the level of attachment to the pet

increases. The findings obtained from the adaptation showed that it was a valid and reliable

measurement tool that could be used in subsequent studies and proper for using to test the

hypothesis (Şahin, Ö. &Kahya, Y., 2018).

Procedure

Participants are told that the study was designed to demonstrate the relationship between

human-pet attachment and perceived stress levels. Participants filled out an informed

consent form and then completed questionnaires consisting of a brief demographic data

questionnaire; PSS and LAPS. These 2 questionnaires measure the hypotheses. First,

participants completed a demographic form, which indicates if they have a pet or not. Later,

all the participants completed PSS, and lastly, only participants who have a pet completed

LAPS. Participants generally completed the questionnaire within 10 minutes. The

questionnaires were published on social media platform of the university and other

platforms mainly those intended for pet owners. All respondents participated in the study via

online questionnaire forms. Participants were given a written debriefing, thanked for their

participation and time. After submitting all questionnaires, the participants had the

opportunity to ask any question about the research.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 10

Design and Analyses

This study involves more than one dependent and independent variables. The independent

variables consist of gender, marital status, educational status, number of children (if any)

and their past experience with any pet. The main dependent variable is the perceived stress

level which is manipulating by independent variables and the second dependent variable is

the attachment level. All statistical analyses were conducted by using The Statistical

Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 25.0 for Windows, (SPSS, Inc., 2017). The

sample data required the use of T-test, ANOVA and two-tailed correlation at the .05

significance level. A t-test is used to compare the stress level of pet owners and non-pet

owners. The correlation design extrapolates the relationship between pet owners’ stress level

and attachment level. In the correlation design, Pearson correlation (r) and significance

value (p) are critical indicators of the relationship between variables. The scatter plot is

applied to examine the positive or negative relationship graphically.

Besides T-test and correlation to test the hypothesis, ANOVA was used for additional

analysis such as comparing the stress level and attachment level of people according to their

types of pets (cat, dog etc.) and the attachment level of people according to their

responsibility type.

Results
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 11

An independent t- test was conducted onPerceived Stress Scale score (PSS score)of

pet owners and non-pet owners. Pet owner participants had lower PSS score (M= 39.5500,

SE= .49833) than non-pet owners (M=42.5515, SE=.55598) (Table 1). The difference was

significant t (412) = -4.032, p= .000<.050, the effect size of the study was small, Cohen’s d=

.39. (See Appendix F for Table 1)

One way ANOVA was conducted on PSS score of animal types (cats, dogs, and

cats-dogs,). There was not a significant difference between PSS scores of people who have

different animal types, F(2,217)=.089, p =.915> .05 (Table 2). (See Appendix F for Table

2).

One way ANOVA was conducted on LAPS scoresof the animal types. There was not a

significant difference between LAPS scores of people who have different types of animals,

F(2,217)=.043, p=.958>.050 (Table 3 ). This means that all group of pet owners’ attachment

score does not differ significantly. (See Appendix F for Table 3)

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 12

In a bivariate correlational analysis, the independent variable, pet attachment, was

not significantly correlated with the dependent variable, stress level (r = .056, p=.406>.050)

(Table 4). (See Appendix F for Table 4).

An independent t-test was conducted between LAPS score of male and female pet

owners. Male pet owners had lower LAPS score (M= 54.04, SE= 1.620) than female pet

owners (M=59.93, SE=.572). The difference was significant t (218 = -3.429, p= .000<.050,

(Table 5); the effect size of the study was medium, Cohen’s d= .60.(See Appendix F for

Table 5).
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 13

One way ANOVA was conducted on LAPS score of participants according to

responsibility types (main responsible, shared responsibility, and others care for the pet).

There was a significant difference between LAPS score and responsible caregivers,

F(2,217)=.12.662, p=.000>.050 (Table 6). This means at least one group of pet owners were

different on their LAPS score. According to Levene’s Test of Homogeneity of Variances,

the variances are not equal, p=.008<.050. According to Dunnett C, there is a significant

difference between people who are mainly responsible and share responsibility,

CI[1.00,.37]. There is a significant difference between people who are mainly responsible

and others care, CI[.57,28.91]. There is no significant difference between people who have

shared responsibility and others care, CI[-3.18,25.29]. The study represented a medium-

sized effect η =.105. (See Appendix F for Table 6).

Discussion

The purposes of this study were to investigate if pet ownership relates to lower perceived

stress levels and if pet owners’ attachment levels to their pets relate to lower perceived

stress levels. The first hypothesis was supported while the second one was not supported by

the findings of the study.

The present study has shown that there is a relationship between owning a pet and perceived

stress level. It means that people who have a pet also have lower stress levels and people

who do not have a pet also have higher stress levels. However, pet attachment level did not

seem to affect pet owners’ perceived stress levels. Wright (2018) has examined the

relationship between pet attachment, perceived stress and life satisfaction. The results of the

study revealed that there was no significant difference between pet owners’ and non-pet

owners’ perceived stress.

The results suggested that there is not a relationship between pet attachment level and

perceived stress level of pet owners. This finding of the study contradicts a previous
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 14

research. Wright (2018) has found a significant positive relationship between pet attachment

and perceived stress level. Different from the current study, Wright (2018) has used

Comfort from Companion Animals Scale (CCAS). On the other hand, our findings are

supported by a previous study on the relationship between pet attachment and perceived

stress. Koontz’s (2009) did not find any significant relationship between pet attachment and

perceived stress level, LAPS was also used in this study to measure pet attachment level.

In addition to these results, there are some additional results. According to the findings of

the study, there is a difference between pet attachment level and the type of animal people

have. People who have cats and dogs have higher pet attachment scores than people who

have other types of animals such as birds, fish, rabbit etc. Because it was only designed for

cat and dog owners, it must be conceded that our measure of pet attachment could be

insufficient as a measurement tool. For this reason, participants who have other animal types

except cat and dog are excluded from the study. Future research should focus on attempts to

develop a more effective and inclusionary measure of pet attachment.

Although the study has a strong internal validity, it should be noted that the present study is

limited, in that the sample consisted of a convenience sample which makes generalization

difficult for the whole population. This limitation may affect the external validity of the

study. Another limitation of this study is that the perceived stress level may be affected by

different covariates. In order to say that stress levels can be reduced by owning a pet, a

future study should be conducted and covariates should be controlled in this study.

The results of this study support that there is a difference between women and men on their

pet attachment score. Women who own pets have higher levels of pet attachment than men

who own pets. These findings of the study support the previous research in relationship

between pet attachment and stress level. Wright (2018) has founded female pet owners

scored significantly higher on pet attachment compared to the male pet owners.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 15

Yet, the number of men participants in our study was lower than expected. In a future study,

it is recommended that more participants of both sexes be found equally or closely to each

other. Limited amount of time is also another limitation of this study. However, this study

provided evidence of the relationship between owning a pet and lower stress levels. There

were different studies examined the relationship between owning a pet and mental health,

depression or physical health but any other study has not been done to determine if pet

ownership relates to lower perceived stress levels. Wade (2017) has investigated the

relationship between stress and pet/stuffed animals with college students. Yet, no significant

correlations were found to support hypotheses of the study.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 16

References

Ainsworth, M. D., & Bowlby, J. (1954). Research strategy in the study of mother-child
separation. Courrier, 4, 105-131.

American Veterinary Medical Foundation [AVMA]. (2017). Animal-assisted

interventions: Definitions. Retrieved from
https://www.avma.org/KB/Policies/Pages/Animal-Assisted-
InterventionsDefinitions.aspx

Beetz, A., Bales, K. (2016) Affiliation in human-animal interaction.In:The Social

Neuroscience of Human-Animal Interaction, eds. L.S. Freund, S. McCune, L.
Esposito, N.R. Gee, P. McCardle, American Psychological Association, pp. 107-125

Beetz, A., Uvnäs-Moberg, K., Julius, H., &Kotrschal, K. (2012). Psychosocial and
psychophysiological effects of human-animal interactions: The possible role of
oxytocin. Frontiers in Psychology, 3(234), 1-15. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00234

Bernstein, E. M., & Putnam, F. W. (1986). Dissociative Experiences Scale. PsycTESTS

Dataset. doi:10.1037/t07472-000

Bretherton, I. (1992). The origins of attachment theory: John Bowlby and Mary
Ainsworth. Developmental Psychology, 28(5), 759-775.

Brown, S., &Katcher, A. (2001). Pet Attachment and Dissociation. Society &
Animals,9(1), 25-41. doi:10.1163/156853001300108973

Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., &Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress.
Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 385-396.

Eskin, M., Harlak, H., Demirkıran, F. veDereboy, Ç. (2013).

AlgılananstresölçeğininTürkçeyeuyarlanması: Güvenirlikvegeçerlikanalizi. New/Yeni
Symposium Journal, 51(3), 132-140.

Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). London, UK: Sage.

Field, P., Orsini, N., Gavish, L.,Packman, W. (2009). Role of Attachment in Response to
Pet Loss. Death studies. 33. 334-55. 10.1080/07481180802705783.

Gee, N. R., Hurley, K. J., & Rawlings, J. M. (2016). From the dog's perspective: Welfare
implications of HAI research and practice. In L. S. Freund, S. McCune, L. Esposito,
N. R. Gee, & P. McCardle (Eds.), The social neuroscience of human-animal
interaction (pp. 217-235). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/14856-013

Hopp, H. (2017, November). How to write a research proposal. Retrieved from

http://www.anglistik.uni-
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 17

mannheim.de/studium/unterlagen/downloads/how_to_write_a_research_proposal/res
earch_proposal_howto.pdf

Jennings, L. B. (1997). Potential Benefits of Pet Ownership in Health Promotion. Journal

of Holistic Nursing, 15(4), 358–372.https://doi.org/10.1177/089801019701500404

Johnson, T. P., Garrity, T. F., &Stallones, L. (1992). Psychometric evaluation of the

Lexington Attachment to Pets Scale (LAPS). Anthrozoös, 5(3), 160-175.

Karameşe, H. (2014). Lexington EvcilHayvanlaraBağlanmaÖlçeği'ninTürkçe'ye

uyarlanması, Türkçeformungeçerlikvegüvenirlikçalışması (Yükseklisanstezi,
GaziosmanpaşaÜniversitesi, EğitimBilimleriEnstitüsü, Tokat).

Koontz, J. L. (2009). Stress, social support, health and human-animal bond in single
mother (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northcentral University, Arizona state.
Abstract retrieved from http://gradworks.umi.com/33/84/3384703.html

Lani, J. (2018). Missing Values in Data. Retrieved from

https://www.statisticssolutions.com/quantitative-analysis/

Miltiades, H., & Shearer, J. (2011). Attachment to pet dogs and depression in rural older
adults. Anthrozoös, 24(2), 147-154.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2752/175303711X12998632257585

Ramirez, M. (2014). Psychometric Properties of the Lexington Attachment to Pets Scale:

Mexican Version (LAPS-M). A multidisciplinary journal of the interactions of people
and animals, 27(3), 351-359.

Ramírez, M. T. G., & Hernandez, R. (2014). Benefits of dog ownership: Comparative

study of equivalent samples. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 9, 311-315. Retrieved
from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2014.08.002

Sable, P. (2013). The pet connection: An attachment perspective. Clinical Social Work
Journal, 41(1), 93-99. doi:10.1007/s10615-012-0405-2

Stallones, L., Marx, M. B., Garrity, T. F., & Johnson, T. P. (1990). Pet Ownership and
Attachment in Relation to the Health of U.S. Adults, 21 to 64 Years of Age.
Anthrozoös,4(2), 100-112. doi:10.2752/089279391787057206

Şahin, Ö. &Kahya, Y. (2018). Evcilhayvanabağlanmaölçeği: Geçerlikve

güvenirlikçalışması. Nesne, 6(12).174-197.

Phillips, A. C. (2013). Perceived Stress. Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine, 1453-1454.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_479

Wade, S. T. (2017). Examining stress and pet/stuffed animal attachment levels with college
students. Social Sciences Research Journal, 4(2), 1-13. Retrieved from
https://journals.tdl.org/ssrj/index.php/ssrj/article/view/40/26
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 18

Wright, & L., S. (2018, March 01). The relationship between pet attachment, perceived
stress and life satisfaction: An online survey. Retrieved from
http://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/103362
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 19

APPENDIX A

Consent Form
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 20

APPENDIX B

Demographic Form
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 21
 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 22

APPENDIX C

Lexington EvcilHayvanlaraBağlanmaÖlçeği

TürkçeFormu

Açıklama:Ensevdiğinizevcilhayvanınızh TamamenKatılmı BirazKatılmıyor BirazKatılıyor TamamenKatılıy

akkındakikısaifadelerekatılıpkatılmadığı yorum um um orum

nızlütfenbelirtiniz. Her

birifadeiçintamamenkatılıyorum,

birazkatılıyorum,

birazkatılmıyorumvetamamenkatılmıyor

umseçeneklerindenbiriniseçiniz.

Cevapvermeyireddedebilirsiniz.

1.Evcil 0 1 2 3

hayvanımbenimiçinherhangibirarkadaşı

mdandahadeğerlidir.

2.Evcil 0 1 2 3

hayvanımlasırlarımısıklıklapaylaşırım.

3.Evcil hayvanlar, 0 1 2 3

aileüyeleriyleaynıhakveayrıcalıklarasahi

polmalıdır

4.Evcil 0 1 2 3

hayvanımıneniyiarkadaşımolduğunainanı

yorum.
 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 23

5.İnsanlara karşıduygularım, 0 1 2 3

onlarınevcilhayvanımadavranışlarındanet

kilenir.

6.Evcil hayvanımıseviyorumçünkü o 0 1 2 3

banahayatımdakiinsanlarınçoğundandaha

sadıktır

7.Evcil 0 1 2 3

hayvanımınresimlerinibaşkainsanlaragös

termektenzevkalırım.

8.Bence 0 1 2 3

evcilhayvanımsadecebirhayvandır.

9.Evcil hayvanımıseviyorumçünkü o 0 1 2 3

beniaslayargılamaz

10.Evcil hayvanım, kendimi ne zaman 0 1 2 3

kötühissettiğimianlar.

11.Sık 0 1 2 3

sıkevcilhayvanımhakkındadiğerinsanlarl

akonuşurum.

12.Evcil hayvanımbenianlar. 0 1 2 3

13.Evcil 0 1 2 3

hayvanımısevmeminsağlıklıkalmamayar
 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 24

dımettiğineinanırım

14.Evcil hayvanlar da 0 1 2 3

insanlarkadarsaygıyıhakediyor.

15.Evcil hayvanımlaçokyakınbirilişkimiz 0 1 2 3

var.

16.Evcil 0 1 2 3

hayvanımaiyibakabilmekiçinhemenheme

n her şeyiyaparım.

17.Evcil hayvanımlasıksıkoynarım. 0 1 2 3

18.Evcil hayvanımımükemmelbir dost 0 1 2 3

olarakgörüyorum.

19.Evcil hayvanımbenimutlueder. 0 1 2 3

20.Evcil 0 1 2 3

hayvanımınaileminbirparçasıolduğunuhi

ssediyorum

21.Evcil hayvanımaçokbağlıdeğilim. 0 1 2 3

22.Evcil 0 1 2 3

birhayvanasahipolmakmutluluğumamutl

ulukkatar

23.Evcil 0 1 2 3

hayvanımıbirarkadaşolarakgörüyorum.
 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 25

Appendix D

AlgılananStresÖlçeği (ASÖ) TürkçeFormu

Hiçbir NeredeyseHi Bazen OldukçaSık ÇokSık

Zaman çbir Zaman

1.Son bir ay içinde, 1 2 3 4 5

beklenmedikşekildegerçekleşenolaylardandolayı ne

sıklıktaüzüldünüz?

2.Son bir ay içinde ne sıklıkta, 1 2 3 4 5

yaşamınızdakiönemlişeylerikontroledemediğinizihissettin

iz?

3.Son bir ay içindekendinizi ne sıklıkta, 1 2 3 4 5

gerginvestreslihissettiniz?

4.Son bir ay içinde, yaşamınızdaki can sıkıcıdurumlarla 1 2 3 4 5

ne sıklıktabaşarılıbirbiçimdebaşettiniz?
 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 26

5.Son bir ay içinde ne sıklıkta, 1 2 3 4 5

yaşamınızdameydanagelenönemlideğişikliklerleetkilibirbi

çimdebaşaçıktığınızıhissettiniz?

6.Son bir ay içinde ne sıklıkta, 1 2 3 4 5

kişiselsorunlarınızlabaşetmeyeteneğinizdeneminoldunuz?

7.Son bir ay içinde ne sıklıkta, 1 2 3 4 5

işlerinistediğinizgibigittiğinihissettiniz?

8.Son bir ay içinde ne sıklıkta, yapmakzorundaolduğunuz 1 2 3 4 5

her şeyinüstesindengelemeyeceğinizidüşündünüz?

9.Son bir ay içindeyaşamınızdakirahatsızediciolayları ne 1 2 3 4 5

sıklıktakontroledebildiniz?

10.Son bir ay içinde ne sıklıkta, yaşamınızdakiolaylara 1 2 3 4 5

hakim olduğunuzuhissettiniz?
 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 27

11.Son bir ay içinde, 1 2 3 4 5

kontrolünüzdışındagerçekleşenşeylerdendolayı ne

sıklıktaöfkelendiniz?

12.Son bir ay içinde ne sıklıkta, 1 2 3 4 5

üstesindengelmekzorundaolduğunuzşeylerüzerindedüşün

dünüz?

13.Zamanınızı nasılgeçirdiğinizi son bir ay içinde ne 1 2 3 4 5

sıklıktakontroledebildiniz?

14.Son bir ay içinde ne sıklıkta, güçlüklerin, 1 2 3 4 5

üstesindengelemeyeceğinizkadarçoğaldığınıhissettiniz?
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 28

Appendix F

SPSS Tables

Table 1

Table 2
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 29

Table 3
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 30

Table 4

Table 5
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 31

Table 6
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 32
 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMAN-ANIMAL ATTACHMENT AND
PYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING 33

View publication stats