↓ Skip to main content

An empirical examination of the conceptualization of companion animals

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#46 of 289)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
7 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
An empirical examination of the conceptualization of companion animals
Published in
BMC Psychology, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40359-018-0228-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ruben Hoffmann, Carl Johan Lagerkvist, Malin Hagberg Gustavsson, Bodil S. Holst

Abstract

The extensive keeping of companion animals and the substantial monetary amount we spend on these animals indicate that they are highly valued. Although the benefits humans derive from keeping cats and dogs have been extensively studied, how we conceptualize these animals has received limited attention. How people conceptualize cats and dogs is important as it influences human behavior and the well-being of humans as well as animals. The objective of this paper was to examine the conceptual meaning of dogs and cats and the relative importance of meanings assigned to these species. Based on a Swedish on-line survey (n = 2028) the free-elicitation method was used to measure the salience of conceptualizations for dogs and cats as this method measures the accessibility of the focal object in people's memory. An R-index approach was used to analyze the importance and dominance of attributes on the premise that the order in which attributes were listed by respondents reflects their relative importance. The sum of the choice probability was used to evaluate the stochastic rank order of attributes and Somers' D was used to examine difference in rankings between groups of respondents. For dogs, human well-being in terms of emotional and social support, and emotional attachment (friendship, love, companionship, joy and loyalty) were found to be most important while elements related to the animals themselves (e.g. personality of the animal) were found to be less important. For cats, personality of the animal was along with love found to be most important. The results were largely consistent across different types of households. The results provide information on the relative importance of salient attributes and thus indicate which attributes that are important to consider, for example, when analyzing human-animal interaction, animal welfare, human health and subjective-well-being, or the economic value of cats and dogs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 5 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 16%
Student > Master 2 11%
Researcher 1 5%
Other 4 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 6 32%
Psychology 6 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Other 3 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 October 2018.
All research outputs
#896,378
of 13,181,559 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychology
#46
of 289 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,677
of 268,606 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,181,559 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 289 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,606 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them