Advertisement

Qualitative Directions in Human–Animal Companion Research

Chapter

Abstract

Researcher inquiries into topics such as animal welfare, animal affect, and human experiences of the human–animal bond have historically been rooted in positivist epistemologies and reliant on quantitative measures and experiments, rather than naturalistic observations and individual experiences (Fraser, 2009). In this chapter, I target several topic areas within human–animal and animal research to explore the existence and benefits of qualitative research approaches. I begin with an overview of qualitative research with humans, including the benefits of using qualitative research to explore topics such as understanding perspectives on animal abuse and neglect, human–animal companionship, grief and loss issues, and the benefits of animal-assisted therapy. Following this, I explore qualitative research endeavors into the subjective experiences of animals (e.g., Minero, Tosi, Canali, & Wemelsfelder, 2009), as well as methodological relations between quantitative behavioral observations and qualitative categories of animal affect, welfare, and experience (e.g., Wemelsfelder, Hunter, Mendl, & Lawrence, 2001). I conclude with an overview of the challenges to using qualitative methods, evaluative criteria specific to qualitative research on human–animal connections, and ethical considerations for both animal and human–animal qualitative inquiry.

Keywords

Qualitative Research Animal Welfare Animal Behavior Qualitative Researcher Evaluative Criterion 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgment

I would like to thank Deborah Olson, Ph.D., for thoughtful and very helpful comments on an earlier version of this chapter.

References

  1. Adams, C. L. (1997). Owner grieving following companion animal death. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Guelph, Canada.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, M., Gallagher, B., & Jones, B. (2006). Domestic violence and the abuse of pets: Researching the link and its implications in Ireland. Practice, 18, 167–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American Psychological Association. (2000). Ethical principles of psychologist and code of conduct. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved, from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, P. K. (2003). A bird in the house: An anthropological perspective on companion parrots. Journal of Human-Animal Studies, 11, 393–418.Google Scholar
  5. Anonymous (2006). Guidelines for the treatment of animals in behavioural research and teaching. Animal Behaviour, 71, 245–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Atwood-Harvey, D. (2005). Death or Declaw: Dealing with moral ambiguity in a veterinary hospital. Journal of Human-Animal Studies, 13, 315–342.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Balcombe, J. (2009). Animal pleasure and its moral significance. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 118, 208–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Banks, J. A. (1998). The lives and values of researchers: Implications for educating citizens in a multicultural society. Educational Researcher, 27, 4–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beckstead, A. L., & Morrow, S. L. (2004). Mormon clients’ experiences of conversion therapy: The need for a new treatment approach. The Counseling Psychologist, 32, 651–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bermond, B. (1997). The myth of animal suffering. In M. Dol, S. Kasanmoentalib, S. Lijmbach, E. Rivas, & R. van den Bos (Eds.), Animal consciousness and animal ethics (pp. 125–143). Assen: Van Gorcum.Google Scholar
  11. Brown, S. (2007). Companion animals as selfobjects. Anthrozoös, 20, 329–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Burghardt, G. M. (1985). Animal awareness: Current perceptions and historical perspective. American Psychologist, 40, 905–919.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burghardt, G. M. (1991). Cognitive ethology and critical anthropomorphism: A snake with two heads and hognose snakes that play dead. In C. A. Ristau (Ed.), Cognitive ethology: The minds of other animals: Essays in honor of Donald R. Griffin (pp. 53–90). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  14. Burghardt, G. M. (2007). Critical anthropomorphism, uncritical anthropocentrism, and naïve nominalism. Comparative Cognition and Behavior Reviews, 2, 136–138.Google Scholar
  15. Burgon, H. (2003). Case studies of adults receiving horse-riding therapy. Anthrozoös, 16, 263–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Burkhardt, R. W. (1997). The founders of ethology and the problem of animal subjective experience. In M. Dol, S. Kasanmoentalib, S. Lijmbach, E. Rivas, & R. van den Bos (Eds.), Animal consciousness and animal ethics (pp. 1–13). Assen: Van Gorcum.Google Scholar
  17. Burrows, K. E., Adams, C. L., & Spiers, J. (2008). Sentinels of safety: Service dogs ensure safety and enhance freedom and well-being for families with autistic children. Qualitative Health Research, 18, 1642–1649.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Castel, L. D., Williams, K. A., Bosworth, H. B., Eisen, S. V., Hahn, E. A., Irwin, D. E., et al. (2008). Content validity in the PROMIS social-health domain: A qualitative analysis of focus-group data. Quality of Life Research, 17, 737–749.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Cieurzo, C., & Keitel, M. A. (1999). Ethics in qualitative research. In M. Kopala & L. A. Suzuki (Eds.), Using qualitative methods in psychology (pp. 63–76). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Connell, C. M., Janevic, M. R., Solway, E., & McLaughlin, S. J. (2007). Are pets a source of support or added burden for married couples facing dementia? Journal of Applied Gerontology, 26, 472–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Conniff, K. M., Scarlett, J. M., Goodman, S., & Appel, L. D. (2005). Effects of a pet visitation program on the behavior and emotional state of adjudicated female adolescents. Anthrozoös, 18, 379–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Darrah, J. P. (1996). A pilot survey of animal-facilitated therapy in Southern California and South Dakota nursing homes. Occupational Therapy International, 3, 105–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Denzin, N. K. (2004). The art and politics of interpretation. In S. H. Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy (Eds.), Approaches to qualitative research (pp. 447–472). New York: Oxford Press.Google Scholar
  26. Ellson, T. (2008). Can we live without a dog? Consumption life cycles in dog-owner relationships. Journal of Business Research, 61, 565–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119–161). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  28. Fidler, M. (2003). Animal status as a response to pet owner experience. Anthrozoös, 16, 75–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fine, M. (1994). Working the hyphens: Reinventing self and other in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 70–82). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  30. Fraser, D. (1999). Animal ethics and animal welfare science: Bridging the two cultures. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 65, 171–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Fraser, D. (2009). Animal behaviour, animal welfare and the scientific study of affect. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 118, 108–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Friedmann, E., Thomas, S. A., & Eddy, T. J. (2000). Companion animals and human health: Physical and cardiovascular influences. In A. L. Podberscek, E. S. Paul, & J. A. Serpell (Eds.), Companion animals and us: Exploring the relationships between people and pets (pp. 125–142). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Geertz, C. (1977). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  34. Gilbert, K. R. (2008). Loss and grief between and among cultures: The experience of third culture kids. Illness, Crisis, & Loss, 16, 93–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Glaser, B. G. (1992). Emergence vs forcing: Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
  36. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine.Google Scholar
  37. Greenebaum, J. (2004). It’s a dog’s life: Elevating status from pet to ‘Fur Baby’ at Yappy hour. Journal of Human-Animal Studies, 12, 117–135.Google Scholar
  38. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2004). Competing paradigms in qualitative research: Theories and issues. In S. H. Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy (Eds.), Approaches to qualitative research (pp. 17–38). New York: Oxford Press.Google Scholar
  39. Haverkamp, B. E. (2005). Ethical perspectives on qualitative research in applied psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 146–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Haverkamp, B. E., & Young, R. A. (2007). Paradigms, purpose, and the role of the literature: Formulating a rationale for qualitative investigation. The Counseling Psychologist, 35, 265–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hoshmand, L. L. T. (1991). Clinical inquiry as scientific training. The Counseling Psychologist, 19, 431–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kato, K., Atsumi, T., & Yamori, K. (2004). Generating process of stories in robot assisted activity: A case study of Robot Assisted Activity with pet-type robot at a for-profit nursing home. Japanese Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 155–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kellehear, A., & Fook, J. (1997). Lassie come home: A study of ‘lost pet’ notices. Journal of Death and Dying, 34, 191–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  45. Levine, E. D., Mills, D. S., & Houpt, K. A. (2005). Attitudes of veterinary students at one US college toward factors relating to farm animal welfare. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 32, 481–490.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  47. Mazurek, M., Marie, M., & Desor, D. (2007). Potential animal-centred indicators of dairy goat welfare. Animal Welfare, 16, 161–164.Google Scholar
  48. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  49. Minero, M., Tosi, M. V., Canali, E., & Wemelsfelder, F. (2009). Quantitative and qualitative assessment of the response of foals to the presence of an unfamiliar human. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 116, 74–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Morgan, C. L. (1894). An introduction to comparative psychology. London: Walter Scott.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Morrow, S. (2005). Quality and trustworthiness in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 250–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Morrow, S. L. (2007). Qualitative research in counseling psychology: Conceptual foundations. The Counseling Psychologist, 35, 209–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Morrow, S. L., Rakhsha, G., & Castaneda, C. L. (2001). Qualitative research methods for multicultural counseling. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (2nd ed., pp. 575–603). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  54. Morrow, S. L., & Smith, M. L. (2000). Qualitative research for counseling psychology. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (3rd ed., pp. 199–230). New York: Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  55. Morrow, V. (1998). My animals and other family: Children’s perspectives on their relationships with companion animals. Anthrozoös, 11, 218–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Morse, J. (1995). The significance of saturation. Qualitative Health Research, 5, 147–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Morton, D. B., & Griffiths, P. H. M. (1985). Guidelines on the recognition of pain, distress, and discomfort in experimental animals and an hypothesis for assessment. Veterinary Record, 116, 431–436.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  59. Mueller, S. A. (2003). Boys of divorce and their dogs: The role of the pet dog in helping to manage some gender role conflict issues. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hartford, West Hartford, CT.Google Scholar
  60. Orr, A. E. (2006). The role of pets in the experience of Hurricane Charley victims: A phenomenological study (Florida), Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Capella University.Google Scholar
  61. Pagani, C., Robustelli, F., & Ascione, F. R. (2007). Italian youths’ attitudes toward, and concern for, animals. Anthrozoös, 20, 275–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity—one’s own. Educational Researcher, 17, 16–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Pollo, S., Graziano, M., & Giacoma, C. (2009). The ethics of natural history documentaries. Animal Behaviour, 77, 1357–1360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Ponterotto, J. G. (2005). Qualitative research in counseling psychology: A primer on research paradigms. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 126–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Ramirez, R. (2006). ‘My dog’s just like me’: Dog ownership as a gender display. Symbolic Interaction, 29, 373–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Rivas, J., & Burghardt, G. M. (2002). Crotalomorphism: A metaphor for understanding anthropomorphism by omission. In M. Bekoff, C. Allen, & G. M. Burghardt (Eds.), The cognitive animal: Experimental and theoretical perspectives on animal cognition (pp. 9–17). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  67. Romanes, G. J. (1883). Mental evolution in animals. London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Co.Google Scholar
  68. Sandelowski, M. (1995). Sample size in qualitative research. Research in Nursing and Health, 18, 179–183.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sandøe, P., Christiansen, S. B., & Forkman, B. (2006). Animal welfare: What is the role of science? In J. Turner & J. D’Silva (Eds.), Animals, ethics, and trade: The challenge of animal sentience. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  70. Sherwin, C. M., Christiansen, S. B., Duncan, I. J., Erhard, H. W., Lay, D. C., Mench, J. A., et al. (2003). Guidelines for the ethical use of animals in applied ethology studies. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 81, 291–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Singer, P. (1975). Animal liberation. New York: Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
  72. Tannen, D. (2004). Talking the dog: Framing pets as interactional resources in family discourse. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 37, 399–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Traustadottir. (2001). Research with others: Reflections on representation, difference, and othering. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 3, 9–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Turner, W. G. (1997). Evaluation of a pet loss support hotline. Anthrozoös, 10, 225–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wemelsfelder, F., & Farish, M. (2004). Qualitative categories for the interpretation of sheep welfare: A review. Animal Welfare, 13, 261–268.Google Scholar
  76. Wemelsfelder, F., Hunter, E. A., Mendl, M. T., & Lawrence, A. B. (2000). The spontaneous qualitative assessment of behavioural expressions in pigs: First explorations of a novel methodology for integrative animal welfare measurement. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 67, 193–215.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Wemelsfelder, F., Hunter, T. E. A., Mendl, M. T., & Lawrence, A. B. (2001). Assessing the “whole animal”: A free choice profiling approach. Animal Behavior, 62, 209–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Whittemore, R., Chase, S. K., & Mandle, C. L. (2001). Validity in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 11, 522–537.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wiggett-Barnard, C., & Steel, H. (2008). The experience of owning a guide dog. Disability and Rehabilitation: An International, Multidisciplinary Journal, 30, 1014–1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Wood, L. J., Giles-Corti, B., Bulsara, M. K., & Bosch, D. A. (2007). More than a furry companion: The ripple effect of companion animals on neighborhood interactions and sense of community. Journal of Human-Animal Studies, 15, 43–56.Google Scholar
  81. Würbel, H. (2009a). The state of ethological approaches to the assessment of animal suffering and welfare. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 118, 105–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Würbel, H. (2009b). Ethology applied to animal ethics. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 118, 118–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Yang, S. C., & Chen, S. (2002). A phenomenographic approach to the meaning of death: A Chinese perspective. Death Studies, 26, 143–175.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tennessee State UniversityNashvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations