Sunday, October 28, 2007

Pets: Are They Beneficial To Our Psychological Health?

Blog 2: What psychological effects do animals, and particularly pets, have on humans and why? What recommendations about contact with animals and pets would you make to someone who wants to maximise their psychological health?

Animals have always played a distinctive part in the lives of humans. Domestic pets in most households are considered to be members of the family; we let them sleep on our beds, we have many photographs of them and we talk to our pets as if they were human (Brown, 2006). According to Beck and Meyers (cited in Brown, 2006) an estimated 50% of adults and 70% of adolescents confide in their animals, and many studies have been done into the psychological effects that animals, and particularly pets, have on humans.

The biophilia hypothesis is a concept that was coined by Edward Wilson in 1984. The biophilia hypothesis can be defined as “a fundamental, genetically based human need and propensity to affiliate with other living organisms” (Kahn, 1997). A lot of the research conducted on the environment has a focus on the negative impact of environmental exposure such as radiation and toxic chemicals (Stilgoe, 2001). However, the natural environment can also enhance a person’s health. An example of this is how many pharmaceuticals have been derived from animals and plants. Another example is that contact with the natural world may be of direct benefit to one’s health, and also be a vital component of well-being (Frumkin, 2001). One aspect of the natural world-animals-suggests that contact with animals is able to enhance people’s health and provides the evidence to support this view.

In support of the biophilia hypothesis, Kahn (1997) states that emotional well-being and psychological health can be promoted through human contact with animals. Patients suffering from mental disorders were more socially communicative, less aggressive towards their carers and laughed and smiled more when encouraged to interact with animals. Brown’s research (2006) also supported this, suggesting that stroking and touching animals can have benefits for many people including psycho-social benefits such as a reduction in stress, increased self-esteem and motivation, and also acts as a way of building rapport with the animals.

A different angle on the biophilia hypothesis coined by Edward Wilson is a term known as nature-deficit disorder. Nature-deficit disorder is a concept that was coined by Richard Louv to describe how children today have declining health and well-being and suggests that it is the result of being “alienated from the natural world” (Tucker, 2006). It is inferred that the nature-deficit disorder is a social problem that occurs due to the amount of time children are spending in front of the television instead of actively engaging in nature (Tucker, 2006). Perhaps encouraging children to spend more time outdoors and less time in front of the television would increase their health and mental well-being. Pets can be extremely beneficial for children to increase their psychological health, not only for teaching them that they have a responsibility but by encouraging them to become active through outdoor play with their pet.

There have been some physiological effects that domestic pets can have on a person’s health discovered in research conducted at a Melbourne cardiovascular disease risk clinic. A group of 6000 patients were divided into pet owners and non-pet owners and results showed that among men, cholesterol, triglycerides and systolic blood pressure were statistically significantly lower in pet owners than non-pet owners (Frumkin, 2001). Among the women there was a similar pattern discovered and these findings did not appear to be due to social class, diet, differences in exercise levels or other cofounders. Similarly, Allen (2003) conducted a study into whether domestic pets can influence human blood pressure. The results appeared to indicate that pets may have a social facilitation effect on humans, possibly by relaxing their owners and therefore allowing their owner to perform at their best (Allen, 2003). The results also revealed that pets could be considered to be a form of social support because of the unconditional love that they hold for their owner, meaning that even if you perform poorly on a particular task, your pet will still think you are wonderful regardless of how you performed. Allen’s study (2003) concluded that pets could be very beneficial for psychological interventions that are aimed at increasing a person’s social support due to the fact that people describe their pets as important friends and perceive them as being non-judgmental.

Allen’s results (2003) are consistent with another one of the psychological effects that pets can have on a person’s health, which is the reduction of stress. A study involving 938 Medicare enrollees was conducted where the participants were again divided into pet owners and non-pet owners (Frumkin, 2001). The results showed that pet owners went to the doctor less than non-pet owners and stressful life events were associated with more doctor visits amongst the non-pet owners. These results suggest that people who own pets have better health than non-pet owners and that owning a pet may actually help mediate stress.

A slightly different idea has also been researched in the literature on humans and their interactions with their pets. El-Alayli, Lystad, Webb, Hollingsworth and Ciolli (2006) conducted a study into whether people who owned pets had very favourable views of their pets’ personalities, known as a pet-enhancement bias. Their findings suggested that being around people who are similar to you provides continual self-validation (El-Alayli et al., 2006). A person who is similar to their pet was more likely to have a pet-enhancement bias and it was therefore a positive contributing factor to their psychological well-being with more life satisfaction, less negative affect and a tendency towards greater happiness reported in the results.

Recommendations: Based on the research findings above, there are several recommendations that can be made about contact with animals and pets to people who wish to maximize their psychological health. People with mental disorders showed less aggression towards their carers, were more socially communicative and laughed and smiled more when engaging in contact with animals (Kahn, 1997), which suggests that rehabilitation and therapy centres may be able to enhance their patients’ psychological health through the introduction of animals to their recovery programs. The process of simply stroking or touching animals has been shown to reduce stress and increase self-esteem and motivation (Brown, 2006) so for people who it may not be possible for to own a pet, the occasional visit to the zoo or a petting farm may be significantly beneficial for their psychological health.

Another recommendation that can be made is based on the finding that owning a pet is also implicated with a reduction in the number of visits to the doctor (Frumkin, 2001) which could be an important factor in maximizing a person’s psychological health. Moreover, pet owners who have highly favourable views of their pets are more satisfied with life, have less negative self affect and have a tendency towards greater happiness (El-Alayli et al., 2006). Becoming a pet owner can therefore be a strong recommendation for someone looking to maximize their psychological health.

In conclusion, becoming a pet owner provides you with a friend for life. They will provide you with unconditional love no matter how mad you get at them for sharpening their claws on your leather couch or for chewing on your favourite pair of shoes, and ultimately owning a pet can positively influence and even maximize your psychological health and well-being.

References

Allen, K. (2003). Are pets a healthy pleasure? The influence of pets on blood pressure. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12 (6), 236-239.

Brown, K. (2006). Pastoral concern in relation to the psychological stress caused by the death of an animal companion. Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 9 (5), 411-422.

El-Alayli, A., Lystad, A.L., Webb, S.R., Hollingsworth, S.L. & Ciolli, J.L. (2006). Reigning cats and dogs: A pet-enhancement bias and its link to pet attachment, pet-self similarity, self-enhancement and well-being. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 28 (2), 131-143.

Frumkin, H. (2001). Beyond toxicity: Human heath and the environment. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 20 (3), 234-240.

Kahn, P.H. (1997). Developmental psychology and the biophilia hypothesis: Children’s affiliation with nature. Developmental Review, 17, 1-61.

Stilgoe, J.R. (2001). Gone barefoot lately? American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 20 (3), 243-244.

Tucker, P. (2006). Curing “nature-deficit disorder”. Futurist, 40 (3), 13-13.
Appendix: Self Assessment
1. Theory
For my blog topic on pets, I found it quite difficult initially to find theories relating to how pets can maximise people’s psychological health. The main theories I mentioned were the biophilia hypothesis, nature-deficit disorder and pet-enhancement bias. These were not directly related to pets, but did relate to animals in general and were able to be applied to my pets blog topic.

2. Research
I feel that I have demonstrated sound use of the research findings throughout my blog. I was able to use fairly broad theories and apply them to my blog topic specifically. I think my understanding of these findings can also be seen throughout my blog because I was able to relate the findings back to the blog topic.

3. Written Expression
Readability analysis
Averages
Sentences per paragraph- 4.6·
Words per sentence- 29.2·
Characters per word- 5.2
Readability
Passive sentences- 34%·
Flesch reading ease 23.0·
Flesch-Kincaid grade level- 12.0
I have demonstrated competent use of the APA style of referencing throughout my blog, both with in-text referencing and the references cited at the end of the blog. I consider my blog to be easy for a reader to read as it follows a logical sequence, with each paragraph leading into the next and potentially difficult concepts clarified throughout.

4. Online engagement
My online engagement in second part of the semester has improved on what it was in the first half of the semester. I still found it daunting putting up posts on my blog because I wasn’t sure whether what I was posting would be relevant or interesting to anyone. I made comments on other people’s blogs including comments on the following topics:
Peer popularity

Apart from Blog 2, I made three other blog posts:
I would say that I have improved my online engagement since first half of semester. I posted what I thought were fairly relevant postings and also made comments on other people’s blogs. I also achieved two green stars as opposed to one lightbulb which I had in first half of semester. I wouldn’t say I am completely competent when it comes to creating a blog page and maintaining it but I have definitely learnt a lot from using an online blog and particularly learnt a lot using a blog for a uni subject.

Saturday, October 6, 2007

"Catbook" and People without Pets

I had to laugh to myself recently when I was on facebook when I noticed "catbook". Now I am just presuming most people have some idea about what facebook is so I won't go into explaining it, but I found it somewhat amusing to discover this new application of catbook. You basically create a profile for your cat and it can then request to be friends with other cats! Somehow I don't think my cat will be up at midnight requesting to be friends with the cat next door on 'catbook'....

Another concept I have been thinking about has been how many people actually DON'T have pets. One of my friends was over at my house the other day to work on a group assignment and when one of my cats Tuna came vocally strolling into the room she wasn't quite sure how to act around her and seemed almost uncomfortable. I explained to her that I have been doing research for my blog topic on the psychological effects of having a pet. She then revealed to me that she had never had a pet when she was growing up (or now for that matter) and she said she really doesn't know how to interact with pets, how to hold them and she said she even feels awkward patting them!

For me this was quite shocking, because from my first memories we have always had cats as pets and I think I would have grown up to be a very different person if I had not had pets. I feel that they really enhance my life through what may seem like trivial things to some people. From the first thing in the morning after the alarm goes off, I get a big miaow and cuddle from Tuna and when I arrive home at night there's both Tuna and Serj sitting in the driveway waiting to greet me. I was at home sick recently and both of them stayed snuggled on the end of the bed as if they were looking after me.

Even when I go to my parents house, Muffin will still greet me as I pull into the driveway (although she was a little bitter for a while after I moved out and ignored me..). The love you get from your pets is unconditional love, and no matter how bad your day has been you know that when you arrive home those furry little friends will be there in the driveway waiting to greet you with a big miaow and a cuddle.

Saturday, September 22, 2007

More blog 2 thoughts...

Thanks for all your comments guys! I attended the pet expo out at exhibition park today...this made me think about the psychological health of the pets themselves...I know they aren't neccessarily as intelligent as people but surely being at a pet expo for a weekend sitting in a cage being goo-ed and gaa-ed at with screaming children all around would not be beneficial to the animals psychologically? I witnessed children chasing after chickens who were what seemed to be running for their lives...how can this be psychologically rewarding for the animals? How would humans feel being caged up in a small area being goo-ed and gaa-ed at??

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Blog 2 thoughts.....

~Sooty & Muffin~








What psychological effects do pets appear to have and why? What recommendations about pets would you make to someone who wants to maximise their psychological health? I chose this topic because as anyone who knows me knows how crazy I am about my pets. I have always grown up with cats and I have two 11 year old cats at my parents house and two 2 and a bit year old cats at my place. As I am writing this I can hear one of my cats Tuna running psychotically up and down the hall. Asking her to stop doing so is pointless. Reflecting on this really makes me wonder, do pets maximise a person's psychological health or just send us completely batty......?







~Serj & Tuna~






Blog 1-Classic Experiments:Explaining and Understanding Prejudice, Stereotyping and Aggression.

There are many classical social psychological experiments that have been conducted over the years which reveal important understandings about prejudice, stereotyping and aggression. Prejudice can be defined as aggression or hostility that is directed towards someone because of their membership in a minority group. Stereotyping occurs when certain ideas are held about people who are part of a particular group and is normally based on their membership in that particular group. Stereotypes can be both positive and negative. Aggression is either physical or verbal, and is basically intended to cause pain or harm to a person. There are four particular studies that I consider are most important when considering these concepts. Ranked in order of most important they include; Bandura, Ross and Ross’s imitation of film-mediated aggressive models study, Zimbardo’s Stanford prison experiment, Milgram’s behavioural study of obedience and Dovidio and Gaertner’s aversive racism and selection decisions study.

Bandura, Ross and Ross (1988)
Bandura, Ross and Ross’s (1988) study titled ‘Imitation of Film-mediated Aggressive Models’ aimed to discover whether exposing children to filmed aggression would result in heightened aggressive reactions after viewing. Participants in this study were 48 boys and 48 girls aged 35 to 69 months and all were enrolled in the Stanford University nursery school. There was one female experimenter conducting the study and two adults were the models, one male and one female.

Three experimental groups were formed and there was one control group. Real life aggressive models were viewed by one group, these models were then observed showing aggression on film by another group, and the third group watched an aggressive cartoon character (Bandura, Ross & Ross, 1988). The control group was not exposed to any of the situations involving the aggressive models. The experimental groups were also divided into males and females so that some participants watched same sex models displaying aggression and the other participants observed the opposite sex.

The models were seen punching the inflatable Bobo doll and hitting it with a mallet (Bandura, Ross & Ross, 1988). After the experimental groups had viewed the models’ aggression with the Bobo doll, the participants were observed in a room with a Bobo doll and various other toys to see if they were more or less likely to imitate the models, depending on what aggressive act they viewed.

The findings suggested that children’s aggressive reactions are heightened by exposure to filmed aggression and that the likelihood of aggressive reactions to further frustrations is increased by the observation of models who are displaying aggression on film (Bandura, Ross & Ross, 1988). The implications of this study are that social behaviour could be influenced by mass media such as television, supported by the finding that children modelled their behaviour on exposure to aggressive acts on film.



Bandura's Bobo Doll.


Zimbardo (2004)
Zimbardo’s study titled ‘Stanford Prison Experiment: A simulation study of the psychology of imprisonment conducted at Stanford University’ (2004) aimed to investigate the psychological effects of prison life. The participants responded to an advertisement in the paper asking people to participate in a two week study about the psychological effects of prison life. There were a total of 24 male participants who were randomly assigned to either be a guard or a prisoner.

The participants in this study were all ‘arrested’ and taken to the ‘Stanford Prison’ located in the basement of the Stanford psychology department building. All participants who were prisoners were identified by numbers and wore stockings over their hair in order to take away any individuality they may have had. Neither the guards nor prisoners were told what to do or how to act (Zimbardo, 2004).

The participants started to take on their stereotypical roles of guards and prisoners more and more as the experiment continued. The guards became increasingly aggressive towards the prisoners, causing some of the prisoners to become extremely emotional and stressed out (Zimbardo, 2004). The findings of this study indicate that it was difficult to distinguish where the participants’ roles ended and where their personal identities began. The findings also suggest that the prisoners who had high authoritarianism were able to endure the prison environment for longer than those who did not (Zimbardo, 2004). The guards basically won complete control of the whole prison and were aggressive towards the prisoners as a form of controlling the prison environment. As a result of the participants becoming so involved in their stereotypical roles, the experiment had to be terminated after only six days.


Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment.


Milgram (2003)
Milgram’s (2003) study titled ‘Behavioural Study of Obedience’ investigated how far a person would go when inflicting harm through electric shocks as instructed by another person. The participants in this study were recruited through mail solicitation and through a newspaper advertisement. There were a total of 40 participants aged between 20 and 50.

There was an experimenter and a victim, and the participants took on the role as teacher. The participants were asked to read out questions for the victim to answer, who then pressed one of four switches to indicate his answer which appeared on the shock generator (Milgram, 2003). Participants were then instructed to shock the victim for every incorrect answer, increasing the voltage each time. Voltage ranged from ‘slight shock’ to ‘danger sever shock’.

The findings of this study indicated that although the participants showed distress at having to harm another person through the aggressive act of giving the victim an electric shock, they still continued to do so as instructed by the experimenter. The implications of this study are that participants experienced extreme conflict due to two very strong behaviour dispositions; people learn not to harm others and know it is wrong and they also know to obey people who are perceived as having legitimate authority over others (Milgram, 2003).


Milgram’s Obedience Study.




Dovidio & Gaertner (2000)
Dovidio and Gaertner’s (2000) study titled ‘Aversive Racism and Selection Decisions: 1989 and 1999’ looked at the self-reported racial prejudice and bias in employment selection decisions involving candidates who were black and white. There were a total of 194 participants in this study, 48 white male undergraduates and 64 white female graduates who participated as part of their course requirement.

Participants were required to rate candidates on a scale of one to ten as to whether they were suitable for the position, being strongly qualified, ambiguous or weak. The results of this study showed that stereotyping and prejudice against black people occurred when their qualifications for the position were ambiguous (Dovidio & Gaertner, 2000). The participants reported no prejudice against the black candidate when their qualifications were highly suitable or entirely inappropriate. The implications of these results are that it shows aversive racism and prejudice may stem from inter-group biases, moreover, biases that are based on social categorisation processes (Dovidio & Gaertner, 2000).

Explanation of Rankings
The four studies discussed above are all important regarding stereotyping, prejudice and aggression so I found it quite difficult to rank them in order of what I consider most important. I ranked Bandura, Ross and Ross’s study (1988) in first place because it provides a classic example of how children model their behaviour on watching others performing particular behaviours. The study revealed that aggressive and violent images watched by children on television are very likely to be copied by children in real life.

Zimbardo’s study (2004) was ranked in second place as it demonstrates just how aggressive people can become when taking on a stereotypical role. The guards took control of the prisoners and the whole prison environment through aggressive acts demonstrating to the prisoners they were to comply or suffer the consequences.

I ranked Milgram’s study (2003) in third place because it provides insight into how far a person will go to harm another person when they feel they are forced to comply with an authority figure. This could be used to help explain why so many Germans followed Hitler and the Nazi’s during World War Two.

In fourth place I ranked Dovidio and Gaertner’s study (2000). Their results indicated that inter-group biases could play a role in prejudice and aversive racism. When black candidates were highly suitable for a position or not suitable at all, racism and prejudice did not occur. However, when the candidate’s suitability for the position was ambiguous, participants demonstrated prejudice against them.

Conclusion
There have been many classical social psychological experiments conducted which reveal important understandings about prejudice, stereotyping and aggression. To choose just four of them to reflect what I consider the most important studies proved to be quite difficult. Eventually, I narrowed it down to Bandura, Zimbardo, Milgram, and Dovidio and Gaertner. Bandura’s imitation of aggressive models was ranked first because it highlights just how much aggression on television can influence children’s behaviour, and Milgram’s behavioural study of obedience was ranked second because it stresses the importance of an authoritative figure when being instructed to impose harm on another person through aggressive acts. Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison experiment was in third place because it revealed how participants became so involved in their stereotypical roles that it was hard to distinguish where their roles ended and personal identities began. Finally, I ranked Dovidio and Gaertner’s aversive racism study in fourth place because it revealed important understandings about prejudice and racism when rating black candidates’ suitability for employment.
Summary Table







References

Bandura, A., Ross, D. & Ross, S.A. (1988). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. Readings in Social Psychology (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. pp. 159-168.

Dovidio, J.F. & Gaertner, S.L. (2000). Aversive racism and selection decisions: 1989 and 1999. Psychological Science, 11 (4), 315-319.

Milgram, S. (2003). Behavioural study of obedience. In Lesko, W. (ed). Readings in Social Psychology (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. pp. 242-252.

Zimbardo, P.G. (1999-2004). Stanford Prison experiment: a simulation study of the psychology of imprisonment conducted at Stanford University. Retrieved July 21, 2004 http://www.prisonexp.org/
Links to Available Articles
Appendix
Self Assessment

1. Theory
For the blog topic I chose, it was a requirement to rank what I consider to be the four most important experiments in terms of understanding and explaining aggression, prejudice and stereotyping. I felt that it was not necessary to use theory for this blog topic as I heavily relied upon the research articles as key background to the topic. It would not have been viable for me to use theory as the word limit was very tight for a topic I could write so much on.

2. Research
I feel that I have demonstrated in my blog that I identified the main research findings of each of the studies pertaining to aggression, prejudice and stereotyping. I also feel that I have demonstrated understanding of the findings of each of the studies, as well as making effective use of these findings through examples relating the findings to other situations e.g. the power of an authority figure.

3. Written Expression

Readability analysis

Averages
· Sentences per paragraph- 9.4
· Words per sentence- 22.8
· Characters per word- 5.4

Readability
· Passive sentences- 27%
· Flesch reading ease 23.0
· Flesch-Kincaid grade level- 12.0

I have demonstrated use of the APA style of referencing throughout my blog, both with in text referencing and the references cited at the end of the blog. I have also provided a summary table with what I consider to be key points of each of the experiments. I consider my blog to be easy for a reader to read as I have broken it up with subheadings, media resources and the summary table so it is not just one huge page of writing for a reader to battle with, and it follows a logical sequence.

4. Online engagement
My online engagement to date has been somewhat slow. I submitted my blog feed early in the semester and posted a test blog to ensure it was set up correctly but after that I was unsure of where to begin. I was unfamiliar of how the blog ‘culture’ worked because I had never used myspace or facebook or anything like that. At first, I did find the idea of creating blog postings very daunting. I’m not computer illiterate, however, I am by no means anywhere near being a computer genius and the thought of posting links to other web pages and embedding media sources made me quite nervous.

Apart from Blog 1, I made three other blog posts since setting up my blog page; Bandura’s Bobo Dolls, Wikipedia Definitions and Testing Web Links. I also regularly read other people’s blog pages as a lot of what people are contributing is very interesting and relevant to the course.
I would have to say I need to improve my online engagement because I have not commented meaningfully on anyone’s blog page yet, although I hope to do so once Blog 1 has been submitted. I feel I have developed my skills of using a blog page because now I know how to create hyperlinks and even add media resources to my blogs, particularly compared to the start of the semester when I had no idea how to do any of it.















testing web links

I just wanted to make sure I know how to create a web link so that when I submit my real blog 1 I will know it's correct! fingers crossed......

go to google

Saturday, August 11, 2007

Bandura's Bobo Dolls

Bandura's Bobo Doll experiment is one that I always remember because of the ridiculous looking dolls the children were required to hit!

Bobo Doll Experiment
Albert Bandura believed that aggression must explain three aspects: First, how aggressive patterns of behavior are developed; second, what provokes people to behave aggressively, and third, what determines whether they are going to continue to resort to an aggressive behavior pattern on future occasions (Evans, p. 22, 1989).

In this experiment, he had children witness a model aggressively attacking a plastic clown called the Bobo doll. There children would watch a video where a model would aggressively hit a doll and " ‘...the model pummels it on the head with a mallet, hurls it down, sits on it and punches it on the nose repeatedly, kick it across the room, flings it in the air, and bombards it with balls... After the video, the children were placed in a room with attractive toys, but they could not touch them. The process of retention had occurred.

Therefore, the children became angry and frustrated. Then the children were led to another room where there were identical toys used in the Bobo video. The motivation phase was in occurrence. Bandura and many other researchers founded that 88% of the children imitated the aggressive behavior. Eight months later, 40% of the same children reproduce the violent behavior observed in the Bobo doll experiment. (Isom, 1998)
http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/bandura.htm