Search

Simple Summary: The bond between humans and their pets has long captivated researchers, particularly in understanding how attachment varies based on the type of pet. Cats and dogs display distinct behavioral and social characteristics that shape the dynamics of human–pet relationships. Furthermore, certain human traits have also been identified as influencing this attachment. Our study investigates factors affecting pet attachment among cat and dog owners in the Basque Country, located in northern Spain. By investigating these aspects, our research aims to confirm the human factors that influence the human–animal bond in a previously unstudied population. Our findings confirm that attachment tends to be notably stronger with dogs than with cats and that owner's traits such as being female, younger, not living with children, and the amount of time spent with pets on weekends are associated with stronger attachments to pets. The relationship between humans and their pets has long fascinated researchers, particularly in exploring how attachment varies according to the type of pet. Cats and dogs exhibit unique behavioral and social traits that influence the dynamics of human–pet relationships. Moreover, specific human characteristics have been found to affect this attachment. Our study examines the human factors that influence pet attachment among cat and dog owners in the Basque Country, located in northern Spain. By investigating these elements, our research aims to enhance the understanding of how human factors shape the human–animal bond. The study included a total of 202 participants, of whom 66.8% were dog owners, and 74.8% identified as women, with ages ranging from 18 to 74 years. Consistent with many previous studies, our results indicate that attachment is generally stronger with dogs compared to cats and that owner's characteristics such as being female, younger, not living with children, and the amount of time spent with pets on weekends are linked to stronger attachments to pets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Medical research involving human subjects requires previous results obtained from animal experimentation. A team of animal caretakers, technicians, welfare officers and veterinarians (animal-facility personnel) provide the husbandry and care of animals at many institutions. Researchers, on the other hand, interact with animals only when a specific procedure is being conducted. Working with laboratory animals can bring satisfaction but it can also result in workplace stress. In this study we aimed to investigate the work-related quality of life of biomedical research professionals working with laboratory animals in Spain. Animal-facility personnel showed higher professional-quality-of-life and compassion-satisfaction scores than researchers. Perceived animal stress/pain, human–animal interaction and social support are other factors that influence professional quality of life. By job category, welfare officers/veterinarians and principal investigators reported the highest scores, whereas Ph.D. students reported the lowest, indicating that job category is a contributing factor in professional quality of life. Our study may help in designing future studies or interventions to improve workplace wellbeing of the Spanish population working with laboratory animals. Many workers contribute to the success of animal welfare and study outcomes in biomedical research. However, the professional quality of life (ProQoL) of those who work with laboratory animals has not been explored in Spain. To this end, we adapted the ProQoL scale to the Spanish population working with laboratory animals. Participants were contacted by email and asked to complete an anonymous on-line questionnaire. The study comprised a total of 498 participants, 12.4% welfare officers/veterinarians, 19.5% caretaker/technicians, 13.9% principal investigators, 20.7% investigators, 13.6% research technicians, and 19.9% PhD students. The adapted scale revealed very good reliability and internal validity, providing information about two different subscales, compassion satisfaction and compassion fatigue. Animal-facility personnel showed higher total ProQoL and compassion-satisfaction scores than researchers; PhD students showed the lowest scores. Thus, our results indicate that job category is a contributing factor in perceived professional quality of life. We observed that compassion satisfaction is negatively associated with the perceived animal stress/pain. Participants reporting poorer compassion satisfaction also reported lower social-support scores. Overall, our ProQoL scale is a useful tool for analyzing the professional quality of life in the Spanish population, and may help to design future interventions to improve workplace wellbeing in Spain and other Spanish-speaking populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]