Human–Animal Interaction and Human Prosociality: A Meta-Analytic Review of Experimental and Correlational Studies

ABSTRACT

Pet ownership and interactions with animals confer various physiological and psychological benefits to humans. Although interactions with animals are commonplace, there is no consensus in the literature on the actual impact of animal exposure on prosociality. Hence, this meta-analysis investigated 20 eligible studies (n = 4,116, k = 48) and provided an extensive examination into the different potential moderators of the relationship between human–animal interaction (HAI) and prosociality, such as the distinction between empathy and prosocial behavior, HAI characteristics, and sample characteristics. Overall, a small positive effect size was found (d = 0.22), suggesting that human exposure to animals is associated with an increase in empathy and prosocial behaviors. Additionally, the type of prosociality measure, nature of human–animal interaction, animal species, and animal class significantly moderated the relationship between human–animal interaction and prosociality. We discuss the theoretical, methodological, and practical implications of these findings and highlight areas for further research.

KEYWORDS:

• Animal-assisted therapy
• empathy
• human–animal interaction
• pet ownership
• prosocial

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 In an additional analysis, the LaFollette et al. (2018) study was removed as the human–animal interaction involved rat tickling, which is too fleeting to achieve any material change in prosociality. When this study was excluded, the association remained significant, positive, and small in magnitude (d = 0.22, SE = 0.06, 95% CI = [0.10, 0.34], p < 0.001); the forest plot displaying the effect sizes is in ResearchBox (https://researchbox.org/156). We conducted a similar analysis where we removed the studies by Guéguen and Ciccotti (2008) owing to participants being merely exposed to the confederate’s dog for only a short moment. When this study was excluded, the association also remained significant and positive, albeit trivial in magnitude (d = 0.09, SE = 0.04, 95% CI = [0.01, 0.17], p = 0.020). The relevant forest plot can be found in ResearchBox (https://researchbox.org/156).

Additional information

Funding

This research was supported by grants awarded to Andree Hartanto by Singapore Management University through research grants from the Ministry of Education Academy Research Fund Tier 1 (21-SOSS-SMU-023 & 22-SOSS-SMU-041) and Lee Kong Chian Fund for Research Excellence.