An Introduction to Human Animal

Relationships A Psychological
Perspective 1st Edition Hollin
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmeta.com/product/an-introduction-to-human-animal-relationships-a-psyc
hological-perspective-1st-edition-hollin/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Animals and Society An Introduction to Human Animal

Studies 2nd Edition Margo Demello

https://ebookmeta.com/product/animals-and-society-an-
introduction-to-human-animal-studies-2nd-edition-margo-demello/

Human/Animal Relationships in Transformation:

Scientific, Moral and Legal Perspectives 1st Edition
Augusto Vitale

https://ebookmeta.com/product/human-animal-relationships-in-
transformation-scientific-moral-and-legal-perspectives-1st-
edition-augusto-vitale/

Psychological Type Therapy A Practitioner s Guide to

Strengthening Relationships 1st Edition Brian A.
Gerrard

https://ebookmeta.com/product/psychological-type-therapy-a-
practitioner-s-guide-to-strengthening-relationships-1st-edition-
brian-a-gerrard/

An Introduction to Psychometrics and Psychological

Assessment 2nd Edition Colin Cooper

https://ebookmeta.com/product/an-introduction-to-psychometrics-
and-psychological-assessment-2nd-edition-colin-cooper/
The Animal Mind An Introduction to the Philosophy of
Animal Cognition 2nd Edition Kristin Andrews

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-animal-mind-an-introduction-to-
the-philosophy-of-animal-cognition-2nd-edition-kristin-andrews/

The Animal Mind An Introduction to the Philosophy of

Animal Cognition 2nd Edition Kristin Andrews

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-animal-mind-an-introduction-to-
the-philosophy-of-animal-cognition-2nd-edition-kristin-andrews-2/

Human Animal Relationships in Transformation Scientific

Moral and Legal Perspectives 1st Edition Augusto Vitale
Simone Pollo

https://ebookmeta.com/product/human-animal-relationships-in-
transformation-scientific-moral-and-legal-perspectives-1st-
edition-augusto-vitale-simone-pollo/

Athletic Development A Psychological Perspective 1st

Edition Caroline Heaney

https://ebookmeta.com/product/athletic-development-a-
psychological-perspective-1st-edition-caroline-heaney/

Aquatic Animal Nutrition A Mechanistic Perspective from

Individuals to Generations 1st Edition Steinberg

https://ebookmeta.com/product/aquatic-animal-nutrition-a-
mechanistic-perspective-from-individuals-to-generations-1st-
edition-steinberg/
An Introduction to Human–Animal
Relationships

An Introduction to Human–Animal Relationships is a comprehensive introduction to the

field of human–animal interaction from a psychological perspective across a wide range
of themes.
Hollin examines the topic of the relationships between humans and animals as seen in
owning a companion animal alongside more indirect relationships such as our
approaches to eating meat. The core issues under discussion include the moral and
ethical issues raised in using animals for entertainment, in therapy, to keep us safe, and in
sports such as horse racing. The justifications for hunting and killing animals as sport and
using animals in scientific experimentation are considered. The closing chapter looks to
the future and considers how conservation and climate change may influence
human–animal relationships.
This key text brings an important perspective to the field of human–animal studies
and will be useful to students and scholars in the fields of psychology, sociology, animal
welfare, anthrozoology, veterinary science, and zoology.

Clive R. Hollin is Emeritus Professor at the University of Leicester, UK. He has

published 25 books, mainly on the topic of criminological psychology. This book is the
first in a foray into other areas of psychology.
An Introduction to
Human–Animal
Relationships
A Psychological Perspective

Clive R. Hollin
First published 2021
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2021 Clive R. Hollin
The right of Clive R. Hollin to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by
him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents
Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any
form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter
invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks,
and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Hollin, Clive R., author.
Title: An introduction to human-animal relationships : a psychological perspective /
Clive R. Hollin.
Description: New York : Routledge, 2021. |
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2020049706 (print) |
LCCN 2020049707 (ebook) |
ISBN 9780367277598 (paperback) |
ISBN 9780367277574 (hardback) |
ISBN 9780429297731 (ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: Human-animal relationships. | Human-animal
relationships--Psychological aspects.
Classification: LCC QL85 .H654 2021 (print) | LCC QL85 (ebook) |
DDC 590--dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020049706
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020049707

ISBN: 978-0-367-27757-4 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-0-367-27759-8 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-0-429-29773-1 (ebk)

Typeset in Bembo
by MPS Limited, Dehradun
For

Ebony, Buster, Fly, and Toby

Contents

Acknowledgements viii
Preface ix

Introduction 1

PART I
Animals and psychology 3

1 Animals in psychological research 5

PART II
Mainly of cats and dogs 23

2 Animals as companions 25
3 Pet problems: Aggression 51
4 Pet problems: Anxiety 73
5 Solving pet problems 81

PART III
Humans and animals: Friend or foe? 113

6 Animals amusing and assisting humans 115

7 Animals healers 147
8 Eating, hurting, and killing animals 177
9 Into the Anthropocene 188

Epilogue 191
Index 193
Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Flick for her forbearing every time I said “Do you know what I’ve
read today?” as I prepared to deliver another animal-related snippet. Of which there
were many. Thanks to Eva for the heads up on various topics, including the
Anthropocene, and to Gregory for several helpful tips. Thanks also to Leo for
granting writing-free Tuesday and to TG (see Epilogue) just for being around. I’d
like to thank the good folk at Taylor and Francis for taking a punt on this book which is
a change from my traditional fare. In particular, the editorial team of Lucy McClune and
Akshita Pattiyani gave help and encouragement and for that I’m grateful.
Clive Hollin,
Leicester
Preface

At first glance, this book may appear to be a radical departure from my usual topic of
psychology and crime. However, there is rather more of an overlap than might first meet
the eye. I became interested in the interplay between psychology and animals when
writing about interpersonal violence. Violence is a relatively stable behaviour over time
and is directed towards a range of victims. It is therefore not a coincidence that people
who act violently towards people are also likely to mistreat animals. I wondered if there
anything remarkable about victimisation of animals or whether they are just another
casualty of the ubiquitous belligerence characteristic of our species? From here, I started
thinking about the wider role that animals have played in psychology and, indeed, in our
everyday lives. The list of potential topics in my notes collected under the broad rubric
“psychology and animals” grew longer and longer until a template for this book was
formed. There’s little doubt that I’ll have forgotten something along the way, but I hope
the contents are at least informative.
A second strand feeding into writing this book came from taking over the teaching of
a first-year undergraduate course called Approaches to Psychology. In 1972, when I was a
first-year undergraduate, this course would have been called History and Theory. When
preparing my course, I was reminded that animals of various kinds played a pivotal role
in the work of several of the great figures in the history of psychology. In contemporary
psychology, the use of animals in mainstream psychology has rather gone out of fashion
although, of course, the more biologically inclined psychologists conduct some of their
work on rodents and other animals.
Finally, a third strand is a highly personal one: as a child I was brought up in a family
that did not embrace the idea of keeping pets. (I had an otherwise wonderful
childhood, as you ask.) However, my partner’s family had dogs (and ponies) and so
she has a view of animals as an integral part of everyday life. As soon as it was
practically feasible, we had our first dog, Ebony, and we have never been without one
since. As parents, we had a highly permissive policy on pets so that both our children
were allowed as many pets as they could take responsibility for: over time, their
inventory expanded to include stick insects, mice, guinea pigs, rabbits, tropical fish,
lizards, a gecko (called Monty who my son acquired when he was about 10 years old
and who passed away with much sadness when I was writing this book), and,
inevitably, dogs, ponies, and horses. (A line would have been drawn at birds in cages
x Preface
but the need for that discussion never arose.) As adults, they both have pets so
childhood experience must count for something!
In terms of nomenclature, throughout the text I use the term “human” to distinguish
Homo sapiens from other types of animals. This is simply a convenience for ease of
reading and should not be taken to imply anthropocentric leanings or some esoteric
distinction, such as the presence of a soul, between human and non-human animals on
my behalf.
Introduction

The study of animal behaviour, ethology, has a long history and some ethological studies
have become extremely well known. The Dutch biologist Nikolaas Tinbergen
(1907–1988) was concerned with the instinctual way that animals organise their beha-
vioural patterns. In his studies with sticklebacks, he explored the propensity of the male
three-spined stickleback (a small, highly territorial, freshwater fish) to attack and defend
its territory at the sight of another male. In an elegant series of experiments, Tinbergen
demonstrated that the colour red was the instinctual trigger or stimulus for attack: if the
underside of a wooden model of a stickleback was redder than that of the real fish, the
model would be attacked with greater aggression than a real male (Tinbergen, 1952).
The Austrian ethologist Konrad Zacharias Lorenz (1903–1989) investigated the nat-
ural phenomenon of imprinting. He showed how, in a critical 13- to 16-hour period after
hatching, goslings would imprint on the first moving stimulus they saw. In the natural
course of events, this would be the mother duck but Lorenz contrived that he would be
the first moving object seen by a clutch of goslings. There are photographs of him being
faithfully followed by a gaggle of geese who have imprinted on him. Lorenz shared the
1973 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine with Nikolaas Tinbergen and Karl von
Frisch. (Karl von Frisch (1886–1982) was an Austrian ethologist who studied bees and his
major work was the translation of the honeybee’s waggle dance, which bees use to
transmit information to other bees about distant sources of food.)
The writer Paul Theroux (2019) describes the emotional rollercoaster of his re-
lationship with a Muscovy duck, which he called Willy. Theroux states that he was the
first moving creature Willy saw and from then on their fate was entwined. Imprinting is
indeed a powerful element of nature.
The findings of the early ethologists were seen at the time as potentially being important
for understanding human parental behaviour and child development (Vicedo, 2009;
Zetterström, 2007). The merging of biology and ethnology with psychology was evident
by the 1960s, as illustrated by the work of Wladyslaw Sluckin (1919–1985) on imprinting
(Sluckin, 1964), informing an ethologically informed analysis of mother-infant bonding
(Herbert, Sluckin, & Sluckin, 1982). This style of translational research, extrapolating from
animals to humans, has now faded from fashion. The students who arrive each year at
university fresh to the study of psychology will now read a contemporary literature, both
theoretical and empirical, which is mainly concerned with people. These new students will
focus on people: how we develop from infancy to adulthood, how we interact socially, the
intricacies of our personalities, the relationship between brain and behaviour, the mysteries
of cognition, and the application of psychology to areas as diverse as anti-social behaviour,
the world of work, and mental and physical health.
2 Introduction
Nonetheless, at the beginning of psychology as an academic discipline a great deal of
pioneering research was conducted with non-human animals. The first section of this
book picks out a small number of these classic experimental studies and considers their
contribution to psychology.
The second section considers the diversity of relationships we humans have with our
fellow creatures. These relationships are not best studied within the narrow confines of
the psychological laboratory, rather they are best considered in their natural
environment. There are many sides to these relationships. There are settings in which
animals are our friends (and we theirs): we live with animals as household pets; we enjoy
observing animals in their natural habitat as with, say, bird- or whale-watching; and we
train animals to save lives, to assist the physically impaired, and to keep us safe in
dangerous environments. Set against these partnerships, we take advantage of animals
which are not to their well-being (nor arguably to our dignity as a species). The use of
animals as a source of entertainment comes in several forms: there are zoos where animals
are caged for our fleeting wonder; circuses where animals perform incongruous tricks
to amaze us; television advertising where cute animals entice us to part with our cash;
and there are sports, such as horse and greyhound racing, where animals are trained to
compete for our excitement and for those who wish to gamble.
If some of the entertainment we derive from animals is relatively benign, then there is
much that is not. Our species has little hesitation in the cruel exploitation of
animals. The third section raises questions about our choices in which animals we elect
to eat and, indeed, whether we wish to eat animals. Human cruelty to animals is evident
in the maltreatment of household pets, and the killing of animals in recreational
hunting. Animals are also put to use in the laboratory, raising a host of issues surrounding
vivisection. The closing pages speculate on what the future may hold and how we
humans could try to hold back the impending planetary crisis.

References
Herbert, M., Sluckin, W., & Sluckin, A. (1982). Mother‐to‐infant ‘bonding’. Journal of Child Psychology
and Psychiatry, 23, 205–221.
Sluckin, W. (1964). Imprinting and early learning. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Theroux, P. (2019, 20 June). Diary. London Review of Books, 41, no. 12, 40–41.
Tinbergen, N. (1952). The curious behavior of the stickleback. Scientific American, 187, 22–27.
DOI: 10.1038/scientificamerican1252-22.
Vicedo, M. (2009). The father of ethology and the foster mother of ducks: Konrad Lorenz as expert on
motherhood. Isis, 100, 263–291.
Zetterström, R. (2007). The Nobel Prize for the introduction of ethology, or animal behaviour, as a
new research field: Possible implications for child development and behaviour: Nobel prizes of
importance to Paediatrics. Acta Paediatrica, 96, 1105–1108.
Part I

Animals and psychology

1 Animals in psychological research

The discipline of psychology, at least as taught and practiced in the Western world, has
three readily identifiable formative strands. The first is the psychoanalytic tradition of
Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) and his followers (Brown, 1961); the second is the
establishment by Wilhelm Maximilian Wundt (1832–1920) of the first laboratory for
experimental studies in the field of psychology at the University of Leipzig in Germany
(Blumenthal, 1985); and the third is the influence of a group of Russian scientists which
included the neurologist Vladimir Mikhailovich Bekhterev (1857–1927), the naturalist
Vladimir Aleksandrovich Wagner (or Vagner; 1849–1934), and the physiologist Ivan
Petrovich Pavlov (1849–1936). These early Russian scientists, not constrained by aca­
demic boundaries, variously concerned themselves with biology, neurology, physiology,
and psychology. The work of the last-named researcher, Ivan Petrovich Pavlov, familiar
to generations of psychology students, is where the serious story of animals in psychology
begins. However, it is interesting to make a small detour to see what Sigmund Freud had
to say about animals.

Freud on animals
In his professional work, Freud had little to say about animals, with the exception of
those that appeared in his clients’ dreams and fantasies. One of Freud’s patients, Sergei
Pankejeff (1886–1979), came to Freud with an account of a nightmare experienced on
the night before his fourth birthday. In the dream Pankejeff was lying in bed when the
window swung open and looking out he saw six or seven white wolves, their gaze fixed
upon him, sitting in the tree outside his bedroom. In terror at the wolves’ stares, he woke
up screaming. Freud’s account of the case, known as the Wolf Man, became a psycho­
analytic classic (Freud, 1918).
In his private life, however, Freud had an evident affection for dogs. In 1925, Freud
purchased an Alsatian Shepherd for his daughter’s protection on her evening walks
through Vienna. The dog was called Wolf (make of that what you will) and became a
firm family favourite. Braitman (2014) describes how when Freud was in his mid-70s he
acquired two red chows, one of which, called Jofi, became a treasured companion. Jofi
was allowed in the consulting room during sessions: Freud held the view that Jofi was a
calming influence for patients so that they relaxed and became more candid when she
was present.
Freud (1917) gave his views on the human–animal relationship:
In the course of his development towards culture man acquired a dominating position
over his fellow-creatures in the animal kingdom. Not content with this supremacy,
6 Animals and psychology
however, he began to place a gulf between his nature and theirs. He denied the
possession of reason to them, and to himself he attributed an immortal soul, and made
claims of divine descent which permitted him to annihilate the bonds of community
between him and the animal kingdom. (p. 140)
As will be evident as this book unfolds, there are many contemporary examples that
lend support to Freud’s analysis.

Pavlov’s dogs
As recounted in legions of introductory textbooks, the scientific work with a powerful
bearing on the emerging discipline of psychology was carried out by the Nobel
Prize–winning scientist Ivan Pavlov (Samoilov, 2007). Pavlov was a physiologist and was
awarded the 1904 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine “in recognition of his work
on the physiology of digestion, through which knowledge on vital aspects of the subject
has been transformed and enlarged.”
However, it was for reasons other than his physiological research that Pavlov became
an important figure in psychology.
Pavlov’s research relied upon the measurement of dog’s rate of salivation under
controlled laboratory conditions. In preparation for eating, a dog salivates as a reflex
response to the smell and sight of food. The traditional account is that Pavlov’s
measurements were disturbed because the dogs were salivating when no food was
present but when sounds, such as the clanking of the food pails, associated with food
were audible. In a series of experiments in which the presentation of food was repeatedly
paired with a stimulus such as a ringing bell Pavlov showed that eventually the bell
gained the power to elicit the salivation.
The sequence shown in Figure 1.1 shows the steps in the experiment. The dog’s
naturally occurring reflex is to salivate when it perceives cues associated with food: there

Figure 1.1 Pavlov’s experimental design.

Source: Pavlov, I. P. (1897/1902). The work of the digestive glands. London: Griffin.
 Animals in psychological research 7
is no learning involved, thus an unconditioned stimulus (UCS) elicits an unconditioned
response (UCR). There is, however, no naturally occurring reason why a dog should
salivate at the sound of a bell. In the experiment, the food is repeatedly presented to­
gether with the sound of the bell so that the dog learns to associate the food and the
sound of the bell. In time, the sound of the bell gains the power to elicit salivation. Thus,
the bell is a conditioned stimulus (CS) that elicits salivation as a conditioned response
(CR). As dogs do not naturally salivate to the sound of a bell this is sometimes also called
a conditioned reflex.
The story above is found in the textbooks but, as suggested by Pavlov’s biographers, it
is not the complete story. While Pavlov used a variety of stimuli, such as a buzzer,
harmonium, light, metronome, and whistle, there is some debate about the use of a bell
(Thomas, 1997; Todes, 2014). In addition, it appears that some details of terminology
may have been lost in translation. The term we favour, conditionedresponse, is not what
was originally intended: Pavlov used the Russian word uslovnyi meaning a con­
ditionalresponse (which makes more sense, as the response has become conditional upon
the presence of the stimulus).
Pavlov visited the United States in 1923 and 1929 and on the latter visit made
presentations at the IXth International Congress of Psychology at Yale University and at
the XXXth International Congress of Physiology at Harvard University (Rall, 2016;
Ruiz, Sánchez, & De la Casa, 2003). Thus, the early American psychologists, in parti­
cular John B. Watson (1878–1958), would have been aware of Pavlov’s research and
were undoubtably influenced by it (Todd & Morris, 1986).
While Pavlov made no claims to be a psychologist or a behaviourist, he was interested
in the use of his experimental methods to understand the mind and consciousness.
Pavlov’s research was so revolutionary that interest in his work extended beyond aca­
demia. The novelist Aldous Huxley was certainly aware of Pavlov’s ideas and in­
corporated them into his seminal work Brave New World. In November 1927 the science
fiction writer H. G. Wells wrote about Pavlov’s life in The New York Times Magazine.
Thus, Pavlov became a celebrated scientist, recognised by his peers and an international
public figure.
In reading the accounts of Pavlov’s experiments and their various ramifications it is
easy to forget the dogs: however, Tully (2003) provides an excellent canine record. Tully
recounts how on a “Pilgrimage to the last working place of the behavioral psychologist
Ivan Pavlov in Russia” (p. R117) he discovered a photograph album containing images
of some of Pavlov’s dogs. These photographs, together with the names of the dogs –
Krasavietz, Beck, Milkah, Ikar, Joy, Tungus, Arleekin, Ruslan, Toi, and Murashka – are
reproduced in Tully’s article.
The use of laboratory dogs was also evident outside psychology as seen, for example,
in the development of Beagle Colonies for use in radiation research (Giraud & Hollin,
2016, 2017). Döring, Nick, Bauer, Kϋchenhoff, and Erhard (2017) found that beagles
can be successfully rehomed after life in the laboratory. However, to follow Pavlov’s line
of work, I have selected a small number of seminal pieces of research which both relied
on animals and greatly influenced their own field specifically and psychology generally.
A consideration in the use of laboratory dogs is that they need space and care both of
which cost money. Edward Lee Thorndike (1874–1949) had expanded the range of
laboratory animals by using cats as well as dogs in his work on the law of effect
(Thorndike, 1927). However, as events transpired, it was first pigeons and then rats
which proved to be the alternative to dogs. Before looking at the huge part played by the
8 Animals and psychology
rat in psychological experimentation, we will take a sidestep to look at how animals
contributed to Gestalt psychology.

Kohler’s chimpanzees
Wolfgang Köhler (1887–1967) was a German psychologist who, along with Max
Wertheimer (1880–1943), Fritz Perls (1893–1970), and Kurt Koffka (1886–1941), was a
prominent figure in the formation of Gestalt psychology. Gestalt psychology was con­
cerned with how we make sense of our environment. In perceiving the world around
we do not focus on every individual element it contains, rather we perceive elements to
be part of a greater whole, a gestalt, which can be more than simply the sum of its parts.
While no longer a mainstream theory, Gestalt psychology proved to be an important step
in the study of human sensation and perception.
Kohler’s most well-known work is a series of experimental studies of the problem-
solving abilities of chimpanzees, famously with a chimp called Sultan (Kohler, 1925).
In one study, a piece of fruit was suspended just out of the chimpanzee’s reach and
either two sticks or three boxes were placed in close proximity. At first, the chim­
panzee tried to jump up to grab the banana but it was too high to reach; after several
such failures the chimpanzee attempted to solve the problem. In one study, the pro­
blem of getting the banana could be solved by joining the sticks to form a single longer
stick to knock down the hanging fruit. In a second study, the chimpanzee solved the
problem by stacking the boxes on top of each other and climbing up to reach the fruit
(Figure 1.2).
Kohler suggested that that chimpanzees had exhibited a form of learning that he
called insight learning, the sudden realisation of how to solve a problem. In contrast to
trial-and-error learning or learning by observing someone else solve a problem, insight
learning is a wholly cognitive process dependent upon being able to visualise
the problem and arrive at a solution before making a behavioural response. Of course,
once learned, the problem-solving strategy can be repeated when needed in the future.
We are all familiar with insight learning: inventions are often the result of insight
learning and most people have experienced that Eureka! sensation when the solution to
a tricky problem “pops into our head.”

Skinner’s rats (and pigeons)

After dogs, the animal that became widely used in the laboratory was the rat, speci­
fically the albino Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus). A much-studied animal (Barnett,
1975), there are several benefits to the use of Rattus norvegicus as a laboratory animal: it
is clean, easy to breed, and to keep in captivity. From the experimenter’s perspective,
this breed of rat is easy to tame and to handle and it is a good learner. In all, everything
a psychologist could ask for in a rat, although there was some debate about the relative
merits of rats born in the laboratory versus rats trapped in the wild (e.g., Boice, 1971;
Powell, 1973; Stryjek, 2008).
The first recorded use of laboratory rats in psychological research was by Willard S.
Small (1870–1943) at Clark University, Massachusetts. Small’s concern was with topics
such as the rat’s psychic development and its mental processes (Small, 1989, 1900, 1901).
However, the most influential experimental studies with rats were carried out at Harvard
 Animals in psychological research 9

Figure 1.2 Kohler’s chimpanzees.

Source: Kohler, W. (1924). The mentality of apes. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

University by B. F. Skinner (1904–1990). Skinner also conducted research with pigeons

but it is his experimental studies of learning in rats for which he is best known.
As a young man, B. F. Skinner was aware of Pavlov’s and Thorndike’s research, both of
which informed his own experiments. Some of Skinner’s early wartime work was con­
ducted with pigeons, most notably Project Pigeon, which was an attempt to devise a missile
guidance system utilising the conditioned pecking behaviour of pigeons (Capshew, 1993;
Skinner, 1960). In other research, Skinner investigated topics such as pigeon “superstition”
(Skinner, 1948) and self-awareness (Epstein, Lanza, & Skinner, 1981).
Skinner’s main body of research was conducted with rats. In order to study the rat’s
behaviour, he developed a contained environment, an operant conditioning chamber, now
10 Animals and psychology

Figure 1.3 Skinner box.

Source: Skinner, B. F. (1938). The behavior of organisms: An experimental analysis. New York: Appleton-Century.

known as a Skinner box, which allowed the experimenter to control and manipulate
environmental conditions and observe the rat’s behaviour (see Figure 1.3).
In a typical experiment a hungry rat is placed in a Skinner box and in the course of
exploring its environment it discovers that when it presses a lever a food pellet drops into
the food cup. The rat will quickly learn that lever pressing produces the reward of food:
in operant terminology, the rat’s bar pressing has been positively reinforced. There are
various experimental manipulations that can be investigated such as the schedule, say
fixed versus variable intervals by which rewards are delivered and reinforcement
maintained (e.g., Schoenfeld, Cumming, & Hearst, 1956). Skinner defined four types of
contingency: (1) positive reinforcement, where the frequency of the behaviour is increased
or maintained by its rewarding consequences; (2) negative reinforcement, where the fre­
quency of the behaviour is increased or maintained by avoiding an aversive consequence;
(3) positive punishment, where the frequency of the behaviour is decreased by an aversive
consequence; (4) negative punishment, where the frequency of the behaviour decreases in
order to avoid the loss of a reward.
The rat’s task can be made more complex by, say, making food available if a light is on
but not when the light is off. The rat will learn to lever-press when it is light but not
when dark, thereby showing a discrimination between light and dark: the light therefore
becomes an Antecedent to the rat’s behaviour. The sequence of antecedent : Behaviour :
Consequence, correctly called a three-term contingency, which emerged from Skinner’s
experimental analysis of behaviour, provides the framework for the development of
applied behaviour analysis. Applied behaviour analysis uses the principles of learning to
change behaviours such as delinquency, educational attainment, and mental and physical
health (Fisher, Piazza, & Roane, 2013).
 Animals in psychological research 11
As psychology continued to develop through the 1950s and 1960s, the topic of
attachment came to prominence. With associations with the work of Lorenz and of
Sluckin, the notion of attachment refers to a strong emotional bond that can form
between two people. John Bowlby (1907–1990) highlighted the importance of the
mother–child bond for the infant child’s development (e.g., Bowlby, 1953, 1956).
However, it was Harlow’s research that brought the topic to renewed prominence.

Harlow’s monkeys
The American psychologist Harry Harlow (1905–1981), based at the University of
Wisconsin–Madison in the state of Wisconsin, was concerned with the nature of the
process by which bonding takes place. He conducted a range of studies with newborn
rhesus monkeys and their mothers, investigating his thesis that their attachment depends
on the mother providing tactile comfort to satisfy the infant’s innate need to touch and
cling to their mother for emotional comfort.
Harlow used two basic experimental paradigms. In the first, infant monkeys were
reared in isolation for varying periods of time, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, during their first
year of life. During their period of isolation, the monkeys behaved abnormally by, for
example, grasping their own bodies and rocking impulsively. The isolated monkeys were
then placed with other normally socialised monkeys to determine the effects of their
failure to form an attachment. When introduced to other monkeys, they showed fear
and behaved aggressively, unable to communicate or socialise; they self-harmed,
scratching and biting themselves, and were bullied by the other monkeys. The extent
of the abnormal behaviour was related to the length of the period of isolation. Those
monkeys kept in isolation for 3 months were the least affected, while those held in
isolation for 12 months were affected to the point that they failed to recover from the
effects of their deprivation (Harlow, Dodsworth, & Harlow, 1965).
In the second experimental procedure, infant monkeys were separated from their
mothers immediately after birth and placed for a minimum period of 165 days in cages
where they had access to two surrogate mothers. One surrogate mother was made of
wire and the other was covered in a soft terry towelling cloth; some monkeys could get
milk from the wire mother and some from the cloth mother. The monkeys spent more
time with the cloth mother, even if she had no milk, only going to the wire mother
when hungry then after feeding returning to the cloth mother. If frightened, the infant
monkey sought refuge with the cloth mother (Figure 1.4).
There were later behavioural differences between the monkeys who had grown up
with surrogate mothers and normal mothers. The surrogate-reared monkeys were timid,
unable to interact with other monkeys, easily bullied, and struggled to mate, while the
females became poor mothers. These adverse behaviours were most pronounced in
monkeys raised for more than 90 days with a surrogate mother; if placed in a normal
environment to allow attachments to other monkeys to form, those with fewer than
90 days exposure were most likely to show recovery of normal functioning.
In all, Harlow concluded that a monkey’s normal development relied on some degree
of interaction with an object to which they can cling (clinging being a natural response
in infant monkeys) during the critical period of the first months of life. The experience
of early maternal deprivation caused emotional damage that could be reversed if an
attachment was made before the end of the critical period. However, if maternal
12 Animals and psychology

Figure 1.4 Harlow’s monkeys.

Source: Harlow H. F., Dodsworth R. O., & Harlow M. K. (1965). Total social isolation in monkeys. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

deprivation continued after the end of the critical period, the emotional damage was
permanent (Harlow & Zimmermann, 1959).
Harlow’s work demonstrated the nature and permanence of the damage to the infant
monkeys that could be caused by maternal and social deprivation. If these findings are
generalised to human infants, they reinforce the argument against care homes for babies
and favour the view that adoption into a permanent home is the best option.
The ethical issues raised by Harlow’s studies are discussed in Chapter 8.

Allen and Beatrix Gardner and Washoe

In 1967 at the University of Nevada, Reno, the psychologists Beatrix (1933–1995) and
Allen Gardner, along with primate researcher Roger Fouts, began a project aimed at
teaching American Sign Language to a chimpanzee. In 1970, the project moved to the
Institute of Primate Studies in Norman, Oklahoma. The previous attempts to teach lan­
guage to chimpanzees had not been successful (e.g., Hayes & Hayes, 1952), which may
have been due to trying to teach the spoken word. The Gardners reasoned that verbal
communication may be too difficult for a chimpanzee and they elected to use sign language.
 Animals in psychological research 13

Figure 1.5 Washoe in conversation.

Source: This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA. Gardner, RA, Gardner, BT (1969).
Teaching sign language to a chimpanzee. Science 165, 664–672.

Their project was carried out the with a female chimpanzee named Washoe, after Washoe
County, Nevada. To meet her need for companionship, Washoe (1965–2007) was brought
up in an environment as similar as possible to that of a human child. Washoe had her own
8 × 24-foot trailer with spaces for cooking, living, and sleeping. She sat with the family at
the dinner table and had access to clothes, toys, books, and so on. Like any human child, she
had a regular routine of responsibilities, play, and rides in the family car (Figure 1.5).
The rule within the project was that anyone in the presence of Washoe had to
communicate using sign language, rather than speech, in order to create a consistent, less
confusing environment for Washoe. Over the duration of the research, Washoe learned over
300 words that she could reliably sign and use appropriately (Gardner & Gardner, 1969;
Gardner, Gardner, & Van Cantfort, 1989). The ability to communicate allowed the
researchers an appreciation of Washoe’s deeper level of understanding about herself and her
environment. Thus, for example, Washoe was shown herself in a mirror, and asked what she
was saw: she signed “Me, Washoe.” It was also observed that Washoe showed empathy for
the students working on the project by signing more slowly for newcomers. The full and
fascinating story of Washoe’s life is recorded in detail on the Friends of Washoe website
(friendsofwashoe.org). However, the research into ape language faded such that it became, as
summed up by Kulick (2017), a “Promising field that tanked” (p. 359).
14 Animals and psychology
Seligman’s dogs
What do we do when we are faced with an aversive situation? The natural, instrumental
response is to try to escape from or avoid the unpleasant situation, but what happens if
there is no escape? In a series of experiments, the psychologist Martin Seligman from the
University of Pennsylvania studies the behaviour of dogs unable to escape from or avoid
an unpleasant stimulus. The basic experimental setup, as shown in Figure 1.6, is that a
dog is placed in a container, called a shuttle box, which is divided in two by a fixed
barrier. When the dog first receives an electric shock through the floor of the box it
reacts by barking, running, urinating, and showing other signs of fear until it jumps the
barrier and escapes the shock. This is the standard procedure in an escape-avoidance
experimental paradigm. When the procedure is repeated for the next trial, the same dog
will cross the barrier more quickly than on the preceding trail and so on for subsequent
trials until optimum performance is reached.
The dog’s natural avoidance of pain can be interrupted by restraining the dog and ex­
posing it to inescapable electric shocks before beginning the avoidance learning procedure
(e.g., Seligman & Maier, 1967). Seligman (1972) describes what happens in this situation:

Such a dog’s first reactions to shock in the shuttle box are much the same as those of
a naive dog. However, in dramatic contrast to a naive dog, a typical dog which has
experienced uncontrollable shocks before avoidance training soon stops running and
howling and sits or lies, quietly whining, until shock terminates. The dog does not
cross the barrier and escape from shock. Rather, it seems to give up and passively

Figure 1.6 Seligman’s dogs.

Source: Seligman MEP, Maier SF. Failure to escape traumatic shock. Journal of Experimental Psychology.
1967;74:1–9.
 Animals in psychological research 15
accepts the shock. On succeeding trials, the dog continues to fail to make escape
movements and takes as much shock as the experimenter chooses to give (p. 407).

The interference effect of prior unescapable shock on normal responding appears to

dissipate over time so that after a few days the dog returns to normal functioning.
An explanation for the dog’s actions is that it learns that its behaviour and the
anticipated consequences (escaping the shock) does not happen when the shock is
unavoidable. This experience acts to destabilise the dog’s natural instrumental behaviour:
the term learned helplessness was coined for this type of behaviour (Maier, Seligman, &
Solomon, 1969). Later work showed that learned helplessness was not peculiar to dogs but
was also found in cats, fish, mice, and rats. This phenomenon has also been observed in
both young (Nolen-Hoeksema, Seligman, & Girgus, 1986) and adult humans (Hiroto &
Seligman, 1975).
The applied dimension to learned helplessness lay in the parallels between what is
observed in animals and in the cognitive, emotional, and motivational features of
depression in humans. In particular, the view expressed by some people with de­
pression that they are unable to control significant aspects of their life resonates with
the notion of learned helplessness. This observation helped to stimulate a line of
clinical research (Abramson, Seligman, & Teasdale, 1978; Maier & Seligman, 2016;
Miller & Seligman, 1975).
As psychology matured, the use of animals in psychological experiments fell out of
fashion and the emphasis shifted to human cognition. This change is best exemplified
with learning theory, the bastion of animal experimentation and the advent of social
learning theory with its focus on internal processes such as cognition and emotion
(Bandura, 1977). Indeed, the change in direction taken by psychological research was
heralded as a cognitive revolution (Baars, 1986). Although there was a renewed
interest in comparative psychology, a hybrid of psychology and ethology (Greenberg &
Haraway, 2002).

Comparative psychology
The notion of comparative psychology has been with us for some time (Morgan, 1902).
Dewsbury (2003) notes that contemporary comparative psychology is the study of the
functioning of non-human animals which has its roots in several traditions, namely: (i)
European Ethology exemplified by the work of Lorenz and Tinbergen as discussed above;
(ii) Sociobiology, which seeks to understand social behaviour in evolutionary terms
(Wilson, 1975) extending to Behavioural Ecology, the study of influence of ecological
forces on the evolution of animal behaviour (Davies, Krebs, & West, 2012); (iii)
Evolutionary Psychology, the product of merging psychology with evolutionary biology
(Dunbar & Barrett, 2007).
The lines of investigation followed by comparative psychology, sometimes referred to
as animal psychology, may include comparisons across species but that is not its sole
purpose. The wider focus of comparative psychology includes heredity and the relative
influence on behaviour of genes and environment, mating behaviours, and parenting,
and social behaviours such as play, aggression, and communication. At an individual
level, the concern may be with topics such as instincts, learning, and eating.
16 Animals and psychology
Animal cognition
Following the “cognitive revolution” in mainstream psychology, the study of animal cog­
nition became a focus within comparative psychology. It is clear that while the human brain
followed its particular evolutionary path in terms of size and architecture (Holloway, 2015),
it has features in common with other animals, particularly the great apes. As exemplified by
Washoe, there is some overlap in the cognitive abilities of humans and primates; for example,
both species have causal cognition (Penn & Povinelli, 2007), reasoning skills (Vonk &
Subiaul, 2009), and the ability to communicate (Moore, 2016). Suddendorf and Whiten
(2001) suggest that the level of cognition reached by great apes is similar to that of a 2-year-
old human. However, as Vonk and Aradhye (2015) explain, in comparing humans and
primates, the unresolved question is whether the similarities and differences in cognitive
functioning are simply a matter of degree or whether there is a fundamental gap.
The level of sophistication of cognitive functioning raises the issues of metacognition
and consciousness: the ability to be aware of one’s own thoughts and emotions. Is the
ability to be aware of one’s own cognitions a uniquely human attribute? While it is
doubtful that the same degree of metacognition is present in humans and primates, it
remains a possibility that some facets of metacognitive ability do cross species boundaries
(Smith, Coutinho, Boomer, & Beran, 2012).
However, moving away from primates, there are other species which have attracted
attention because of their ostensible cognitive ability. There are several species of birds that
display intelligent behaviour (Emery, 2006). In particular, the corvids have a range of
cognitive skills (e.g., Bugnyar & Kotrschal, 2002) and it may be a mistake to underestimate
the humble chicken (Marino, 2017). A range of species, including primates, several types
of birds, and otters use tools (Emery & Clayton, 2009); while away from mammals and
birds, lizards display cognitive abilities (Matsubara, Deeming, & Wilkinson, 2017) and fish
appear to process social information (Webster & Laland, 2017).

Animal models
The notion of comparative physiology medicine is based on the observation that, to a
greater or lesser degree, humans share physiological and behavioural characteristics with
other species of animals. It follows that we humans can learn about ourselves by studying
animals, particularly those with similar biological functioning. In some instances, the re­
search is harmful to the animals in the study; this point is discussed further in Chapter 8. In
tracing the history of using animals to model human functioning, Ericsson, Crim, and
Franklin (2013) note that there is nothing new about the notion of animal models; for
example, ancient Greeks used dogs to search for the location of intelligence while in the
17th century William Harvey carried out anatomical studies with live animals, including
fish and birds, to inform his mapping of human blood circulation.
Geyer and Markou (1995) make the point that in practice the phrase “animal models”
has a diversity of meaning. Thus, with reference to animal models of psychiatric disorder,
they state that:

At one extreme one can attempt to develop an animal model that mimics a
psychiatric syndrome in its entirety …. At the other extreme, one more limited
purpose for an animal model is to provide a way to systematically study the effects of
potential therapeutic treatments. (p. 787)
 Animals in psychological research 17
The previously discussed learned helplessness model of depression provides an example
of an animal model of a human psychiatric condition. From the original premise, the
research progressed and the animal models of depression become more complex, en­
compassing a wider range of factors (e.g., Czéh, Fuchs, Wiborg, & Simon, 2016). There
are animal-based models of other psychiatric conditions that may be so exact as to focus
on a particular aspect of a complex disorder such as schizophrenia (Ayhan, McFarland, &
Pletnikov, 2016). Alongside physiological and psychiatric conditions, there are also
animal models, often incorporating a great deal of biological research, of human beha­
viours such as conduct disorder (Macrì, Zoratto, Chiarotti, & Laviola, 2018), alcoholism
(Higley & Linnoila, 1997), and aggression (de Boer, 2018). The purpose of animal
models of aggression is described by de Boer (2018): “Circuit-level knowledge of the
neuromolecular underpinnings of escalated aggression has great potential to guide the
rational development of effective therapeutic interventions for pathological social and
aggressive behavior in humans” (p. 86).
In summary, it is important to keep in mind that a model is just that: a representation
of how biological, psychological, and behavioural systems may function and not an
exact copy.

Anthropomorphism
One of the hallmarks of familiarity with animals, particularly among pet owners, is a
psychological tendency to attribute human properties to an animal in order to explain its
behaviour. This is not to say that animals do not have identifiable personalities – there is
a body of research concerned with animal personality (e.g., Gartner, 2015) – rather that
the cognitive abilities of animals can be over-estimated. Shettleworth (2010) takes the
phenomenon of insight learning to illustrate this point. As discussed above, Kohler
studied the problem-solving abilities of chimpanzees and explained what he observed in
terms of insight learning. However, while this explanation fits the observations, it is not
necessarily correct. Shettleworth cites studies showing that pigeons can behave in the
same way as chimpanzees in solving the problem of obtaining an out-of-reach reward
(e.g., Epstein et al., 1981). An alternative explanation to insight is that it is the animal’s
accumulated experience with the elements of the problem, rather than a sudden insight,
which allow it to behave effectively in the novel, problematic situation. Shettleworth
makes the comment that: “Although the extent of human–animal cognitive similarity is
undoubtedly a key issue for comparative psychology, it sometimes seems the agenda is to
support anthropomorphic interpretations rather than to pit them experimentally against
well-defined alternatives” (p. 478).
Shettleworth acknowledges that it is easy to accept a “clever animal” explanation
rather than the altogether less wonderful “killjoy” account that seems to deny any sig­
nificant continuity between human and animal functioning. In support of this position
Shettleworth (2012) makes the case that the two types of explanation for animal func­
tioning have their roots in different scientific traditions. A Darwinian perspective has as
its core the continuity of evolution so that that there are similarities, including likenesses
in mental events, across species. The alternative experimental approach, as seen for
example with Tinbergen and with Skinner, is altogether more prosaic in seeking to
establish whether such similarities exist.
Serpell (2002) suggests that anthropomorphism can be looked at from an evolutionary
perspective. As the social environment of humans and some animals became increasingly
18 Animals and psychology
shared so it suited both species to maintain that closeness. While the function of the
relationship may have changed over time, producing a context where pets are com­
monplace, the animals provide much valued non-human social support. In return for
providing social support the animals receive food, warmth, and an accepting social
environment. From this point of view, anthropomorphism is a good thing all round.
However, the tipping point from a supportive to a destructive relationship has been
passed for some people who keep animals as pets. First, as discussed in the following
chapter, the animal’s environment becomes one where animals are treated like humans,
sometimes to the extreme in terms of wearing human clothes and eating human food.
This change may become counterproductive so that an animal used to a great deal of
attention becomes distressed, noisy, and destructive when left alone. Second, the ani­
mal’s appearance may be changed either through surgery, as in docking tails and ears, or
through selective breeding. A programme of in-breeding may produce a desired set a of
characteristics, such as the dachshund’s elongated body, but there may be a physiological
price to pay as seen with the bulldog’s chronic respiratory problems. In this light, Serpell
makes a telling point: “If bulldogs were the products of genetic engineering by agri-
pharmaceutical corporations, there would be protest demonstrations throughout the
Serpell (2002) Western world, and rightly so. But because they have been generated by
anthropomorphic selection, their handicaps not only are overlooked but even, in some
quarters, applauded” (p. 447).
The use of animals in psychological research has led to some notable findings, such as
the principles of reinforcement and the notion of learned helplessness. However, some of
this research also raises ethical and questions about the treatment of the animals in the
studies. In the following chapters, the psychological findings will be referred to as the
need arises, the moral and ethical issues are looked at in detail later. The focus now shifts
from the rarefied world of the psychological laboratory to the seemingly more mundane
world of those animals we choose to keep with us as pets.

References
Abramson, L. Y., Seligman, M. E. P., & Teasdale, J. D. (1978). Learned helplessness in humans:
Critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 49–74.
Ayhan, Y., McFarland, R., & Pletnikov, M. V. (2016). Animal models of gene–environment inter­
action in schizophrenia: A dimensional perspective. Progress in Neurobiology, 136, 1–27.
Baars, B. J. (1986). The cognitive revolution in psychology. New York: The Guilford Press.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Barnett, S. A. (1975). The rat. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Blumenthal, A. L. (1985). Wilhelm Wundt: Psychology as the propaedeutic science. In C. E. Buxton
(Ed.), Points of view in the modern history of psychology (pp. 19–50). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Boice, R. (1971). Laboratorizing the wild rat (Rattus norvegiens). Behavior Research Methods &
Instrumentation, 3, 177–182.
Bowlby, J. (1953). Child care and the growth of love. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books.
Bowlby, J. (1956). Mother-child separation. Mental Health and Infant Development, 1, 117–122.
Braitman, L. (2014). Dog complex: Analyzing Freud’s relationship with his pets. Fast Company:
https://www.fastcompany.com/3037493/dog-complex-analyzing-freuds-relationship-with-his-
pets. (Accessed 10 March 2019).
Brown, J. A. C. (1961). Freud and the post-Freudians. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin.
Bugnyar, T., & Kotrschal, K. (2002). Observational learning and the raiding of food caches in ravens,
Corvus corax: Is it ‘tactical’ deception? Animal Behaviour, 64, 185–195.
 Animals in psychological research 19
Capshew, J. H. (1993). Engineering behavior: Project Pigeon, World War II, and the conditioning of
B. F. Skinner. Technology and Culture, 34, 835–857.
Czéh, B., Fuchs, E., Wiborg, O., & Simon, M. (2016). Animal models of major depression and their
clinical implications. Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry, 64, 293–310.
Davies, N. B., Krebs, J. R., & West, S. A. (2012). An introduction to behavioural ecology (4th ed.).
Chichester, West-Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.
de Boer, S. F. (2018). Animal models of excessive aggression: Implications for human aggression and
violence. Current Opinion in Psychology, 19, 81–87.
Dewsbury, D. A. (2003). Comparative psychology. In D. K. Freedheim & I. B. Weiner (Eds.),
Handbook of psychology: Vol. 1: History of psychology (pp. 67–84). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Döring, D., Nick, O., Bauer, A., Kϋchenhoff, H., & Erhard, M. H. (2017). How do rehomed la­
boratory beagles behave in everyday situations? Results from an observational test and a survey of
new owners. PLoS ONE, 12, e0181303.
Dunbar, R. I. M., & Barrett, L. (Eds.). (2007). The Oxford handbook of evolutionary psychology. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Emery, N. J. (2006). Cognitive ornithology: The evolution of avian intelligence. Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society B, 361, 23–43.
Emery, N. J., & Clayton, N. S. (2009). Tool use and physical cognition in birds and mammals. Current
Opinion in Neurobiology, 19, 27–33.
Epstein, R., Lanza, R. P., & Skinner, B. F. (1981). “Self-awareness” in the pigeon. Science, 212(4495),
695–696.
Ericsson, A. C., Crim, M. J., & Franklin, C. L. (2013). A brief history of animal modeling. Missouri
Medicine, 110, 201–205.
Fisher, W. W., Piazza, C. C., & Roane, H. S. (Eds). (2013). Handbook of applied behavior analysis. New
York: Guildford Press.
Freud, S. (1917/1948). A difficulty in the path of psychoanalysis. In The Standard Edition of the Complete
Works of Sigmund Freud, vol. XVII (pp. 135–144). London: Hogarth Press. (Trans James Strachey.)
Freud, S. (1918/2002). The ‘Wolfman’ and other cases. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Modern
Classics. (Trans Louise Adey Huish.)
Gardner, R. A., & Gardner, B. T. (1969). Teaching sign language to a chimpanzee. Science, 165,
664–672.
Gardner, R. A., Gardner, B. T., & Van Cantfort, T. E. (Eds.). (1989). Teaching sign language to chim­
panzees. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Gartner, M. C. (2015). Pet personality: A review. Personality and Individual Differences, 75, 102–113.
Geyer, M. A., & Markou, A. (1995). Animal models of psychiatric disorders. In F. E. Bloom and D. J.
Kupfer (Eds.), Psychopharmacology: The fourth generation of progress (pp. 787–798). New York: Raven
Press.
Giraud, E., & Hollin, G. J. S. (2016). Care, laboratory beagles and affective utopia. Theory, Culture &
Society, 33, 27–49.
Giraud, E., & Hollin, G. J. S. (2017). Laboratory beagles and affective co-productions of knowledge. In
M. Bastian, O. Jones, N. Moore, & E. Roe (Eds.), More-than-human participatory research
(pp. 163–177). New York: Routledge.
Greenberg, G., & Haraway, M. M. (2002). Principles of comparative psychology. Boston, MA: Allyn and
Bacon.
Harlow, H. F., & Zimmermann, R. R. (1959). Affectional responses in the infant monkey. Science, 130,
421–432.
Harlow, H. F., Dodsworth, R. O., & Harlow, M. K. (1965). Total social isolation in monkeys.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 54, 90–97.
Hayes, K. J., & Hayes, C. (1952). Imitation in a home-raised chimpanzee. Journal of Comparative and
Physiological Psychology, 45, 450–459.
20 Animals and psychology
Higley, J. D., & Linnoila, M. (1997). A nonhuman primate model of excessive alcohol intake.
Personality and neurobiological parallels of type I- and type II-like alcoholism. Recent Developments in
Alcoholism, 13, 191–219.
Hiroto, D. S., & Seligman, M. E. P. (1975). Generality of learned helplessness in man. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 31, 311–327.
Holloway, R. L. (2015). Brain evolution. In M. P. Muehlenbein (Ed.), Basics in human evolution
(pp. 235–250). London: Academic Press.
Kohler, W. (1925). The mentality of apes. (Translated from the 2nd. revised edition by Ella Winter.)
London: Kegan Paul.
Kulick, D. (2017). Human–animal communication. Annual Review of Anthropology, 46, 357–378.
Macrì, S., Zoratto, F., Chiarotti, F., & Laviola, G. (2018). Can laboratory animals violate behavioural
norms? Towards a preclinical model of conduct disorder. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 91,
102–111.
Maier, S. F., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2016). Learned helplessness at fifty: Insights from neuroscience.
Psychological Review, 123, 349–367.
Maier, S. F., Seligman, M. E. P., & Solomon, R. L. (1969). Pavlovian fear conditioning and learned
helplessness. In B. A. Campbell & R. M. Church (Eds.), Punishment (pp. 299–342). New York, NY:
Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Marino, L. (2017). Thinking chickens: A review of cognition, emotion, and behavior in the domestic
chicken. Animal Cognition, 20, 127–147.
Matsubara, S., Deeming, D. C., & Wilkinson, A. (2017). Cold-blooded cognition: New directions in
reptile cognition. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 16, 126–130.
Miller, W. R., & Seligman, M. E. P. (1975). Depression and learned helplessness in man. Journal of
Abnormal Psychology, 84, 228–238.
Moore, R. (2016). Meaning and ostension in great ape gestural communication. Animal Cognition, 19,
223–231.
Morgan, C. L. (1902). An introduction to comparative psychology. New York: Scribner’s. (Original work
published 1894 by Walter Scott Publishing, New York.)
Nolen-Hoeksema, S., Seligman, M. E. P., & Girgus, J. S. (1986). Learned helplessness in children: A
longitudinal study of depression, achievement, and explanatory style. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 51, 435–442.
Penn, D., & Povinelli, D. (2007). Causal cognition in human and nonhuman animals: A comparative,
critical review. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 97–118.
Powell, R. E. (1973). Laboratory study of wild rats. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1, 119–120.
Rall, J. A. (2016). The XIIIth International Physiological Congress in Boston in 1929: American
physiology comes of age. Advances in Physiology Education, 40, 5–16.
Ruiz, G., Sánchez, N., & De la Casa, L. G. (2003). Pavlov in America: A heterodox approach to the
study of his influence. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 6, 99–111.
Samoilov, V. O. (2007). Ivan Petrovich Pavlov (1849–1936). Journal of the History of the Neurosciences,
16, 74–89.
Schoenfeld, W. N., Cumming, W. W., & Hearst, E. (1956). On the classification of reinforcement
schedules. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 42, 563.
Seligman, M. E. P. (1972). Learned helplessness. Annual Review of Medicine, 23, 407–412.
Seligman, M. E. P., & Maier, S. F. (1967). Failure to escape traumatic shock. Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 74, 1–9.
Serpell, J. A. (2002). Anthropomorphism and anthropomorphic selection — beyond the “cute re­
sponse”. Society & Animals, 10, 437–454.
Shettleworth, S. J. (2010). Clever animals and killjoy explanations in comparative psychology. Trends in
Cognitive Sciences, 14, 477–481.
Shettleworth, S. J. (2012). Darwin, Tinbergen, and the evolution of comparative cognition. The Oxford
handbook of comparative evolutionary psychology (pp. 529–546). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Skinner, B. F. (1948). ‘Superstition’ in the pigeon. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 168–172.
 Animals in psychological research 21
Skinner, B. F. (1960). Pigeons in a pelican. American Psychologist, 15, 28–37.
Small, W. S. (1900). An experimental study of the mental processes of the rat. American Journal of
Psychology, 11, 133–165.
Small, W. S. (1901). Experimental study of the mental processes of the rat. II. American Journal of
Psychology, 12, 206–239.
Small, W. S. (1989). Psychic development of the young white rat. American Journal of Psychology, 11,
80–100.
Smith, J. D., Coutinho, M. V. C., Boomer, J., Beran, M. J. (2012). Metacognition across species. In J.
Vonk & T. K. Shackelford (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of comparative evolutionary psychology
(pp. 274–291). New York: Oxford University Press.
Stryjek, R. (2008). Devices for handling small mammals in laboratory conditions. Acta Neurobiologiae
Experimentalis, 68, 407–413.
Suddendorf, T., & Whiten, A. (2001). Mental evolution and development: Evidence for secondary
representation in children, great apes and other animals. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 629–650.
Thomas, R. K. (1997). Correcting some Pavloviana regarding “Pavlov’s bell” and Pavlov’s “mugging”.
American Journal of Psychology, ll0, ll5–ll125.
Thorndike, E. L. (1927). The law of effect. American Journal of Psychology, 39, 212–222.
Todd, J. T., & Morris, E. K. (1986). The early research of John B. Watson: Before the behavioral
revolution. The Behavior Analyst, 9, 71–88.
Todes, D. P. (2014). Ivan Pavlov: A Russian life in science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tully, T. (2003). Pavlov’s dogs. Current Biology, 13, R117–R119.
Vonk, J., & Aradhye, C. (2015). Evolution of cognition. In M. P. Muehlenbein (Ed.), Basics in human
evolution (pp. 479–491). London: Academic Press.
Vonk, J., & Subiaul, F. (2009). Do chimpanzees know what others can and cannot do? Reasoning
about ‘capability’. Animal Cognition, 12, 267–286.
Webster, M. W., & Laland, K. N. (2017). Social information use and social learning in non-grouping
fishes. Behavioral Ecology, 28, 1547–1552.
Wilson, E. O. (1975). Sociobiology: The new synthesis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Part II

Mainly of cats and dogs

Human history is marked by the variety of ways in which we interact with other animals.
There are several types of domesticated animals with which large numbers of us share
our daily lives and which give us a great deal of pleasure. We use animals for our
entertainment: we stare at animals in circuses, zoos, aquaria, and dolphin parks; and for
excitement we involve animals in sports such as horse and greyhound racing. There are
other forms of entertainment involving animals including animals on the stage, and in
cinema; we force animals to act in strange ways in advertising commercials to try to
persuade us to purchase consumer items. It is a sad fact that cruelty to animals is prevalent
in many parts of the world. At the most obvious, some people find enjoyment in
harming animals by taking part in blood sports such as hunting, bear baiting, and hare
coursing. Why do humans force animals into these roles? Are contemporary views
changing the way we treat animals in these various contexts? Finally, for eons humans
have survived by eating animals, a fact as true today as it was for the early humans.
However, in some parts of the world the means by which we farm animals has changed
radically and not always for the better. The way in which contemporary society reacts to
mass farming takes a variety of forms ranging from changing the means of production,
such as with free-range eggs, to changing our eating habits by not eating meat.
The following chapters consider what we know about these topics and the
contribution psychology makes to their understanding.
2 Animals as companions

Our early ancestors saw animals as a resource which provided food, fur, and other
materials that enabled them to survive in a harsh environment. The archaeological
records are not definitive, but it is possible that the beginnings of the domestication of
wild animals began about 300 centuries ago. The first domesticated animals, which gave
food and other animal products, were probably goats and sheep followed by chickens. As
civilisation advanced, so the human population increased and farming progressively
became a means of food production. In keeping with this development, larger animals,
such as horses and oxen, were domesticated to assist with tasks such as ploughing and
transportation.
If the first domesticated animals served a utilitarian purpose, why did cats and dogs
become so close to humans? There are various explanations for the beginnings of our
lasting relationship with cats and dogs. Our relationship with the dog, a descendent of
the wolf, has a long history, arguably stretching back over 30,000 years (Kotrschal, 2018;
Vilà et al., 1997; Wang et al., 2016) and may have its origins in hunting where dogs were
used to kill several different types of prey (Guagnin, Perri, & Petraglia, 2018). Over time,
the dog’s hunting skills were refined and the tamer breeds of dog developed abilities,
such as retrieving fallen prey and herding other animals, that augmented the efficiency of
human activities. The archaeological evidence that dogs were buried with their masters
infers that humans and dogs had forged a strong psychological bond. The burial of dogs
with people is found across ancient cultures from Siberia and Greece to China and
Austria, a practice which speaks to the status, perhaps even a spiritual status, afforded to
dogs (Morey, 2006). The ability of dogs to engage in a range of sophisticated cognitive
tasks (Bensky, Gosling, & Sinn, 2013) and to respond to human facial emotional cues
(Yong & Ruffman, 2016) no doubt enhanced their affinity with humans. The point has
been reached, as described by Amiot and Bastian (2017), where the feeling of some
people – primarily pet owners and vegetarians – towards animals is best expressed as
solidarity.
The cat may have been welcomed by humans because it was useful in keeping down
the numbers of rodents attacking grain stores. However, in some cultures the domestic
cat was afforded a much more significant status. As Morey (2006) notes, the ancient
Egyptians “Mummified cats in great numbers, and left the cats’ remains in contexts that
can be legitimately called cemeteries” (p. 168). Indeed, the ancient Egyptians bestowed
high status on several animals, as seen by their ancient cemeteries which reveal the
remains of birds, crocodiles, and gazelles. The cat may have been revered in cultures
other than Egypt; in Cyprus there is evidence of cat burials which pre-date ancient Egypt
(Vigne, Guilaine, Debue, Haye, & Gérard, 2004).
26 Mainly of cats and dogs
In today’s world, our relationship with domesticated animals has taken several forms
(Amiot, Bastian, & Martens, 2016). The most fundamental association arguably being
with those animals we take into our homes and share our everyday lives. These animals
take the role of a companion and, indeed, some of the literature uses the term companion
animals. However, the term pet is more familiar and so is used interchangeably with
companion.
It cannot be assumed that conceptualisations about pets are universal. Sevillano and
Fiske (2016) make the point that we in the Western world hold stereotypes about certain
animals; for example, the stereotype of the dog is of “man’s best friend” leading to the
view that dogs are friendly: as defines a stereotype, the dogs’ friendliness extends to the
majority of dogs. The stereotypical warmth we feel for man’s best friend is not re-
ciprocated in all parts of the world. Podberscek (2009) provides the example of South
Korea where dogs have long been seen as a source of food and, indeed, eating dogs,
sometimes for medicinal purposes, is seen as an aspect of cultural identity not to be
interfered with or threatened by the West.

Pets and pet owners

How many people keep pets? What are the most popular pets? It is not an easy matter to
estimate the size of the pet population and figures may vary significantly across studies.
Murray, Browne, Roberts, Whitmarsh, and Gruffydd-Jones (2010) conducted a ques-
tionnaire survey of cat and dog ownership in 2,980 UK households. They estimate the UK
cat population at 10,332,955 felines and 10,522,186 canines. In all, 26% of the households
owned one or more cats while 31% of the households owned one or more dogs. In 2018,
the company Statista reported a survey of pet ownership in UK households in 2017 and
2018. A substantial number of households had a pet (45%), with the dog the most popular:
it was estimated that 26% of households owned a dog, suggesting a UK canine population
of 8.5 million. The cat was the second most popular pet (18% of households), giving a
feline population of 8 million. After cats there is a rapid fall to the rabbit (2%) in third
place, followed by a long list of somewhat idiosyncratic choices including lizards (0.5%),
rats (0.2%), and, least popular of all, mice (0.3%). The variations across surveys of pet
ownership is due to several factors. The survey methodology may vary from ques-
tionnaires, to telephone polls, and personal interviews, which in turn may influence what
people are prepared to report. There are shifts over time in pet ownership associated with
economic factors and fashion.
Statista estimate that in 2017 the amount pet owners in the UK spent on veterinary
and other pet services was over £4 billion. The estimated cost of keeping a dog, in-
cluding food and insurance, is about £240 a month compared to about £100 a month
for a cat. The large sums involved clearly show that pet ownership is a significant
economic driver for a range of professions and retail outlets.
The Statista survey also revealed a range of reasons why people kept a pet: in answer to
the question “What feelings do you experience as a result of owning a pet?”, the three
most popular answers were “Owing a pet makes me happy” (92% of respondents),
“Owning a pet improves my life” (88%), and “Owning a pet is a privilege not a right”
(88%). The survey confirms, of course, what the majority of pet owners know: a pet can
bring a great deal of happiness and becomes an integral part of everyday household
routines with feeding time, walks, and games. Indeed, pets can become part of a family,
precipitating positive consequences such as the formation of strong attachments and
 Animals as companions 27
increased levels of social interaction. The negative consequences can include child ill-
health because of allergies (Paul & Serpell, 1966).
Given that dogs are the most common pet and, as Udell and Wynne (2008) suggest,
the most “human-like” species, it is not surprising that the weight of research has fo-
cussed on the relationship between dogs and their owners. However, it is not a question
of either a cat or a dog as a pet, everyday experience and empirical data show that cats
and dogs can happily live together in the same household (Thomson, Hall, & Mills,
2018). While the owner–cat relationship is not as thoroughly researched as that of the
owner–dog relationship, there are similarities as well as differences between the two
(Pongrácz & Szapu, 2018).

Feline companions
A stereotype of the cat is that it is a somewhat aloof, solitary animal, altogether less
sociable than the dog: we joke that “Dogs come when they’re called; cats take a message
and get back to you later” or, as Kirk (2019) puts it, “Dogs have masters, cats have staff.”
Bradshaw (2016) explains how this view of cats is a product of history: dogs have been
domesticated for several millennia longer than cats, allowing them time to evolve to
become much more socially interactive with humans than cats. Of course, cats are now
commonplace as companion animals and bring a familiar mixture of pleasure and
tribulations to their owners (Bernstein, 2007). Turner (2017) highlights several areas of
interest in feline–human interaction including cat–human communication, cat–owner
personalities, and problems caused by cats.

Cat–owner interactions
What is it that constitutes a satisfying cat–owner relationship from the owner’s per-
spective? Howell et al. (2017) developed the 33-item Cat-Owner Relationship Scale
(CORS) to assess owners’ views of their relationship with their cat. They report that this
scale contained the three subscales of Pet-Owner Interactions, Perceived Emotional Closeness,
and Perceived Costs. Sample items for these subscales are shown in Table 2.1.
The items comprising the Pet-Owner Interactions subscale of the CORS indicate the
nature of the activities that form interactions between cat and owner. Thus, owners who
regularly interact with their cat spend time playing games with their cat, they will stroke
and pet it, talk to it, watching its actions and have it close by when relaxing. Pongrácz

Table 2.1 Sample Items from CORS (Howell et al., 2017)

Pet–owner interactions
How often do you play games with your pet?
How often do you cuddle your pet?
Perceived emotional closeness
My pet gives me a reason to get up in the morning.
My pet provides me with constant companionship.
Perceived costs
It bothers me that my pet stops me from doing things I enjoyed before I owned it.
It is annoying that sometimes I have to change my plans because of my pet.
28 Mainly of cats and dogs
and Szapu (2018) surveyed a sample of Hungarian cat owners asking about their re-
lationship with their pet and found many similarities with dog owners. However, cat
owners were strongly of the view that their cat is a family member with a high level of
socio-cognitive understanding of human emotion and nonverbal behaviour. Given these
views, cat owners used nonverbal behaviour, particularly pointing and visual cues such as
gazing, to communicate with their cat.
Arahori et al. (2017) compared Japanese cat and dog owners’ views relationship with
their pet and their views of their pets’ emotions and intellect. While cat and dog owners
frequently saw their pets as a family member, perhaps in contrast to Pongrácz and Szapu
this view is stronger for dog owners. In addition, dog owners were more likely to
attribute emotional and intellectual abilities to their pets.
The contrasting findings of the Hungarian and Japanese studies maybe accounted for
in three, not mutually exclusive, ways. There may be sampling differences in age,
gender, and so on; the studies used different questionnaires; and the variation in
findings may reflect genuine cultural differences. The development of standardised
survey instruments will assist in future research so allowing greater confidence to be
ascribed to genuine cultural differences as a cause of variation (Duffy, de Moura, &
Serpell, 2017).

Cat–owner personalities
Bennett, Rutter, Woodhead, and Howell (2017) assembled a list of over 200 adjectives
that could potentially be used to describe a cat’s personality. Two focus groups then
slimmed down this list to 118 words. In the next part of the study 416 adult cat owners
rated a familiar cat on each of the 118 words. The analysis of the ratings yielded the
six personality dimensions of Playfulness, Nervousness, Amiability, Dominance,
Demandingness, and Gullibility. As well as a research instrument, Bennett et al. suggest
that the six personality factors could be put to use by cat adoption programmes in
matching cats with prospective owners. This suggestion is reinforced by the finding of
Finka, Ward, Farnworth, and Mills (2019) that an owner’s personality is related to their
cat’s behaviour, welfare, and lifestyle.
Gosling, Sandy, and Potter (2010) compared the personalities of 4,565 participants,
divided into the four groups of self-identified dog person, cat person, both, or neither,
using the self-report version of the Big Five Inventory (BFI; John, Naumann, & Soto,
2008). The Big Five personality dimensions are Agreeableness, Conscientiousness,
Extraversion, Neuroticism, and Openness. Gosling et al. found that the dog people
scored higher than cat people on Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Extraversion,
and lower on Neuroticism and Openness: these differences remained when sex differ-
ences in pet–ownership rates were controlled. With the exception of Neuroticism,
where they scored highest, the cat people group tended to be lower than the other three
groups on the remaining four dimensions.
Gosling et al. make the suggestion, in keeping with Bennett et al. (2017), that their
findings could be put to practical use: “Self-identification as a certain type of pet person
may also provide relevant and practical information for areas such as pet selection within
animal shelters, pet welfare, and other human–animal relationships. Pet person identi-
fications could also be useful in healthcare settings (e.g., hospitals, mental healthcare
facilities, nursing homes), where an affinity for certain types of animals may affect the
selection of species used in pet therapy” (p. 221).
 Animals as companions 29
A study by Evans, Lyons, Brewer, and Tucci (2019) supports the suggestion that there
may be benefits to taking account of personality in an exercise matching 126 cats and
owners. They found that owners expressed greater satisfaction with cats high in agree-
ableness and low in neuroticism (see the “Feline Five” below). The owner’s impulsivity
and the cat’s agreeableness correlated with higher satisfaction, as did a contrast in owner
dominance and cat agreeableness.
Litchfield et al. (2017) carried out a study in Australia and New Zealand to explore
the personalities of 2,802 pet cats. A sample of owners completed a survey, rating their
cats on 52 personality traits gathered from previous studies. The analysis revealed
the “Feline Five” personality factors of Agreeableness, Dominance, Extraversion,
Impulsiveness, and Neuroticism. Litchfield et al. suggest that knowledge of the factors
could be used to improve cat welfare; for example, highly impulsive cats could react
easily to environmental stressors.

Problems caused by cats

Turner (2017) lists the problem caused by cats as “Allergies, bites and scratches on
owners and non-owners, zoonotic diseases, and predation” (p. 302). The issue of
predation is considered in detail in Chapter 9, leaving health matters and aggression.

Health matters
There are vaccines available for the treatment of allergies, which can cause skin pro-
blems and breathing difficulties, although the simple solution for those who are
strongly allergic to cats is to find another companion animal. Zoonotic diseases are
brought about by bacteria, parasites, and viruses which cross between animals and
humans (Murugan et al., 2015). These diseases can be serious, such as with the Ebola
virus and salmonellosis, or more manageable as with “cat scratch disease,” a bacterial
infection of an open wound caused by a scratch or bite. The risk of ill-health can be
managed close to home, as with other pets, by a good health-care regime for the
cat including regular vaccinations. On a larger scale, coordinated initiatives such as
instigating and maintaining comprehensive records and standardised education for
professionals working with animals may bring widespread benefits (Sterneberg-Van der
Maaten, Turner, Van Tilburg, & Vaarten, 2016).
A cat which is not house trained may be a health risk through soiling either by indoor
elimination of urine and faeces (Barcelos, McPeake, Affenzeller, & Mills, 2018; Heath,
2019) or urine spraying, perhaps to mark territory (Horwitz, 2019). The cause and
management of these problems is discussed in Chapter 5.

Aggression
Feline aggression can take a variety of forms serving different purposes in different
environments; for example, it may be offensive or defensive, predatory, a form of play,
territorial, or a consequence of stress or fear (for a succinct summary, see Penar &
Klocek, 2018). However, for owners of domestic cats, their cat’s aggression becomes a
problem when it is directed at them personally.
A Spanish study reported by Palacio, León-Artozqui, Pastor-Villalba, Carrera-Martín,
and García-Belenguer (2007) looked at animal aggression towards people in the region
30 Mainly of cats and dogs
of Valencia between 1995 and 2000. They found a total of 12,040 recorded acts of
animal aggression towards people, of which 89% involved dogs, 8% cats, and 3% other
species including horses, monkeys, and rodents. For felines specifically, there was an
average incidence of 6.36 aggressive acts per 100,000 people per year: the average
incidence was greater for women (7.1 acts of aggression per 100,000 people per year)
than men (4.6), and greater for children aged from 0 to 14 years (6.8) than for people
aged from 15 to 64 years (5.1) and those over 65 years of age (4.7).
Palacio et al. (2007) looked at the nature of the bite wounds by cats that were mainly single
punctures on the hands. In children, the head and neck areas were bitten more than for adults.
The cats involved were mostly unowned; female Siamese cats were prevalent in cats that
attacked their owners. The most common situation of a bite was a defensive response to a
threat. The most serious bites, requiring medical assistance, were from unowned cats.
Amat and Manteca (2019) note that owner- and family-directed aggression is
common in cats, particularly in single-cat households. They describe the risk factors for
this type of aggression as obtaining the cats from pet shops, poor early socialisation with
people, and if the cat is not allowed outdoors. While not as extreme as aggression,
destructive scratching of household items such as carpets, furniture and window frames
can be both aggravating and expensive for the owner (DePorter & Elzerman, 2019). The
effect of aggression, not surprisingly, is to increase the likelihood of euthanasia or the cat
being put into a shelter.

The nature of the owner–animal relationship

The nature of the relationship and the positive attachments between owners and their
companion animals has, like any other relationship, an array of dimensions which may be
approached from various theoretical standpoints ranging from the biological to the
psychological to the cultural (Beck, 2014; Echeverria, Karp, Naidoo, Zhao, & Chan,
2018; Herzog, 2014; Hosey & Melfi, 2014; Odendaal & Meintjes, 2003). The research
exploring the owner–animal relationship is, like many other areas of psychology enquiry,
sensitive to the methodology employed. In addition, the use of the theoretical termi-
nology in this context should be qualified as exemplified by the concept of attachment. As
discussed above, there is attachment theory in the context of human–human relation-
ships (e.g., Bowlby, 1953, 1956) and while we may think of human–animal attachment
as having similar qualities it does not follow that the two are identical (Crawford,
Worsham, & Swinehart, 2006). Thus, Rehn, Lindholm, Keeling, and Forkman (2014)
demonstrated that while owners form an attachment with their dog, as with other
companion animals, a reciprocal relationship cannot be proven. The dog may form
an attachment but its behaviour towards its owner may equally well be seen as a con-
sequence of positive reinforcement.
Nonetheless, at its most obvious, the relationship with their pet can bring the owner
the personal and social rewards afforded by daily companionship: these rewards may vary
according to the type of animal (Zasloff, 1996), or the animal’s behaviour, or the owner’s
preferences. Blouin (2013) conducted interviews with 28 dog owners in the midwestern
United States, finding that the owners had three distinct orientations towards their pets.
The first orientation Blouin labelled dominionistic: this type of owner has a utilitarian view
of their pet, seeing them as an object only to be valued for their usefulness as, say, a guard
dog. Those owners with a humanistic outlook approached their pet as a surrogate human
and took pleasure in a close emotional attachment with their dog. Finally, a protectionistic
 Animals as companions 31
orientation was marked by a high regard for all animals, including pets as important
companions but also as animals in their own right.
Statts, Sears, and Pierfelice (2006) asked a sample of 302 American male and female
students about pet ownership. The students gave five main reasons for keeping a pet: (i)
to keep active (21.5%); (ii) to prevent loneliness (18.2%); (iii) the pet serves a useful
function (14.2%); (iv) keeping the pet for someone else (12.9%); (v) the pet helps when
times are hard times (10.6%). There was a gender difference such that the women were
more likely keep pets for social support, to help through hard times, or to combat
loneliness. Men were more likely own pets in order to keep active, or because the pet
served a useful function, or to look after the pet for someone else.
The dog owners questioned by Maharaj and Haney (2015) provided a succinct summary of
what a dog brings to its owner’s life. The first point reflects the interpersonal relationships
involving the dog playing a role in family routines. The second point lies in the owner’s
experience of their dog as a subjective being with its own personality and ability to com-
municate and understand the owner. Finally, there are the psychological and health benefits
associated with dog ownership. It is important to state that careful attention to puppy training
is crucial to the future happiness of both owner and dog (González-Martínez et al., 2019).
However, alongside these commonplace rewards there are other dimensions to
consider: Tipper (2011a) reflects that pets may serve the function of reinforcing the
owner’s social and psychological identity:

Unusual pets such as rats or snakes might be part of an “alternative” identity; cats,
poodles, or Chihuahuas might be valued for their “feminine” associations, whereas
others may seek the “masculine” image of dogs such as Alsatians; and British bulldogs,
Yorkshire, or Scottish terriers may express a regional or national identity. (p. 87)

When it comes to the choice of a pet not only are there a range of potential species but also
choice of breed within a species. The decision as which dog to take as a pet can be
influenced by practicalities, such as size age or sex (Boruta, Kurek, & Lewandowska, 2016),
or what is fashionable at the time. Ghirlanda, Acerbi, Herzog, and Serpell (2013) looked at
the popularity of different breeds of dog in America between 1926 and 2005. There was no
evidence that those breeds having more desirable behaviours, such as ease of training and
being longer lived or with fewer inherited genetic disorders were more popular than other
breeds. Ghirlanda et al. conclude that a breed’s popularity at a given time is not so much
due to its intrinsic features but how fashionable it seen to be. An example of a fashionable
breed is found with the rise in popularity of the Chihuahua at a given time as influenced by
Paris Hilton and her favourite dog, Tinkerbell Hilton (Redmalm, 2014). Some dog owners
remain immune to fashion and stay loyal to a particular breed of dog because they like its
temperament or appearance (Sandøe et al., 2017).
In addition, Tipper (2011a) suggests that for many people who experience the ache of
loneliness a pet can be a substitute for people. A companion animal becomes someone to
share one’s life with: we offer care and in return receive attention and, to borrow
Tipper’s (2013) vivid phrase, perhaps existential moments of being. Evans-Wilday, Hall,
Hogue, and Mills (2018) explored how owners may disclose difficult personal facts to
their dogs as opposed to their partner or a confidant such as a close friend. They found
that: “Dog owners reported greater willingness to talk to their dog (and partner)
compared with a confidant across the emotional disclosure topics of depression, jealousy,
anxiety, calmness, apathy, and fear. For topics relating to jealousy and apathy, dog
32 Mainly of cats and dogs
owners showed greater willingness to talk to their dog than their partner and confidant”
(pp. 361–362). Evans-Wilday et al. conclude that dogs can play a similar role as partners
in disclosure of emotions although this does not preclude talking to partners and con-
fidants. An example, perhaps, of the dog as our best friend.
Nast (2006) describes how pets can become a fashion statement, typified by celebrities
prepared to spend outrageous sums of money on pet accessories. Nast notes that a doggie
boutique in Los Angeles, Fifi & Romeo which is frequented by Hollywood stars, sells
miniature cashmere sweaters for $200 and raincoats for $105. The dogs of the rich and
famous in LA are also well catered for at canine spas such as Dog House where they can
indulge in massages and herbal wraps. The exaggeration of the emotional bond between
owner and pet, which as Nast notes can over-step standards of propriety, is used as a
means of justifying commercialisation and scandalous levels of expenditure on animals
(Vänskä, 2016).
A related phenomenon lies in adults without children, whether through choice or not,
treating pets as substitute children. The psychological boundary between pets and
children become blurred to the point of coining names such as “fids” (feathered kids) for
parrots (Anderson, 2003, 2014) and “fur babies” for dogs, treated at “Yappy Hour” at a
bakery cooking delicacies for dogs (Greenebaum, 2004). This view of pets as intimate
companions is a two-edged sword: on one hand it may lead to high levels of care; on the
other hand, it may produce a poor social, dietary, and exercise regime for the animal.
Many pet owners will either buy their pet from a commercial outlet, a pet shop, or
professional breeder, or give a home to a rescue dog from an animal charity. The choice
of where to obtain a pet is not a neutral action, the location selected may have a pro-
found effect on the eventual relationship between owner and animal.

“Puppy farms” and pet shops

The high-volume breeding of dogs in Commercial Breeding Establishments (CBE),
sometimes referred to as “puppy farms” or “puppy mills”, has raised concern about the
short- and long-term prospects for the puppies and their mothers in such establishments
(McMillan, Duffy, & Serpell, 2011). If the retailer does not have high standards of
hygiene, particularly in cases of “high-volume” breeding, there is an elevated risk of
disease (e.g., Schumaker et al., 2012). It is evident that, as with many other species
including humans, the dog’s experiences during the first year of life have a formulative
influence on its later temperament and behaviour (Foyer, Bjällerhag, Wilsson, & Jensen,
2014). McMillan (2017) compared owners’ reports about dogs from CBEs with similar
reports about dogs obtained from other, primarily non-commercial, sources. McMillan
stated that the data, drawn from studies in the UK, Australia, Italy, and the United States:

Suggest that dogs sold through pet stores and/or born in high-volume CBEs have an
increased frequency of a variety of undesirable adulthood behaviors compared with
dogs from other sources, particularly noncommercial breeders. The most common
finding (6 of 7 reports, or 86%) was an increase in aggression directed toward the
dog’s owners and family members, unfamiliar people (strangers), and other dogs.
The most consistent type of increased aggression …. was aggression toward owners
and family members. The other characteristic found in multiple studies was
increased fear …. which was in response to strangers, children, other dogs, nonsocial
stimuli, and being taken on walks. (p. 24)
 Animals as companions 33
As McMillan notes, these data are based on owners’ reports and so are subject to ver-
ification from other sources. In addition, not all commercial breeders should be tarred
with the same brush, some breeders have exemplary standards. Gray, Butler, Douglas,
and Serpell (2016) compared Pug, Jack Russell, and Chihuahua adult dogs raised from
puppies bought from responsible breeders with those acquired from less responsible
breeders. The dogs from responsible breeders were better adjusted across several di-
mensions such as aggressive behaviour and fear of other dogs. Gray et al. suggest this
finding demonstrates the importance of owners acquiring puppies from breeders who
follow the appropriate guidelines of organisations such as the Royal Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) and the British Veterinary
Association (BVA).
McMillan, Serpell, Duffy, Masaoud, and Dohoo (2013) used owner reports of their
adult dog’s behaviour to compare outcomes for puppies purchased from pet stores with
puppies from noncommercial breeders. The dogs obtained as puppies from non-
commercial breeders had fewer problems with aggression, fear of other dogs, and house-
training. McMillan et al. suggest that as compared to noncommercial breeders, dogs from
pet stores have a greater risk of developing undesirable behaviours.

Animal shelters
There are numerous animal charities, such as the RSPCA in the UK, which has almost
50 shelters, and the American Society for Prevention of Cruelty of Animals (ASPCA),
that give a home to stray or unwanted animals. Animals may need shelter because of
changes in the owner’s life such as bereavement, loss of employment, or a change in
family composition such as a newborn child. A survey of cat shelters in Sweden by
Eriksson, Loberg, and Andersson (2009) found that the three most common reasons for
relinquishing a cat were allergy, moving house, and that the cat was homeless. Diesel,
Brodbelt, and Pfeiffer (2010) looked at why owners decide to relinquish their dogs to an
animal shelter. The study took place at 14 shelters in the UK with a sample of 2,806
dogs. They found that the two most frequent explanations for relinquishment were the
dog’s problem behaviour, including aggression and destructiveness, and that the dog
needed more attention than they had time to give. In a substantial number of the cases,
the relinquished dogs had been obtained with little or no planning or advice. Diesel et al.
suggest that levels of relinquishment due to owner-related problems could be amelio-
rated by providing advice about the dog when ownership is taken and by monitoring the
progress of adopted dogs. The dog’s problem behaviours can be tackled through dog
training classes for adopters.
In countries larger than the UK, the issue is magnified. In the United States, there
are approximately 13,600 animal shelters with an annual population of approximately
7.6 million cats and dogs. An estimated 31 to 55% of these animals are put down each
year. In Taiwan, there are cultural and religious traditions that oppose the killing of
unwanted animals and which act to encourage abandoning dogs. This situation has led to
a huge increase in the numbers of stray dogs (Hsu, Severinghaus, & Serpell, 2003). In a
similar vein, some countries have a “no-kill” policy for animal shelters; for example,
since 1981 in Italy it is illegal to put down unwanted stray dogs unless they are either
dangerous or terminally ill. However, as Dalla Villa et al. (2008) explain, the subsequent
rise in the number of stray dogs in Italy has meant that this policy has had the undesired
effect of warehousing dogs in dubious conditions for the remainder of their lives.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 REFERENCE TO THE PLATE.
1. The empalement.
2. A blossom.
3. The same spread open.
4. Seed-bud and pointal.
5. The same magnified.
6. The capsule.
7. The same split into two divisions.
8. One of the divisions uncovered, to show the situation of the seed.
9. A ripe seed.
The specimen of this new and very distinct genus was communicated April
the 11th by the marquis of Blandford from a fine plant in his lordship’s
collection at White Knights, planted against a wall on a south aspect, about
four feet high, and nearly covered with blossoms. Its great fragrance, more
resembling that of the May (Cratægus Oxyacantha) than any thing else we
are acquainted with, makes the plant very desirable to collectors, and the
more so, that it is hardy enough to bear our winters without the shelter of a
green-house, and blossoms so early in spring. This fragrant shrub is a native
of New Holland in the neighbourhood of Port Jackson, from whence we
have seen fine specimens in the collection of A. B. Lambert, esq. who
favoured us with the ripe fruit. Who first introduced the plant, we have not
been able to learn, but have seen it in several collections.
 PLATE DXXI.

ERIOSPERMUM FOLIOLIFERUM.
Leaflet-bearing Eriospermum.
CLASS VI. ORDER I.
HEXANDRIA MONOGYNIA. Six Chives. One Pointal.
GENERIC CHARACTER.
Calyx nullus.
Corolla. Petala sex basi connata, subtus lanceolata, acuta: tria exteriora
patula: tria interiora erecta, cum limbo acuto patulo connivente. Omnia post
impregnationem erecta, in modum coni.
Stamina. Filamenta sex, late lanceolata, acuta, plana, apicibus introrsum
volutis. Antheræ oblongæ, incumbentes.
Pistillum. Germen superum, subrotundum, trisulcatum. Stylus filiformis,
erectus. Stigma obtusum.
Pericarpium. Capsula triloba, trilocularis, trivalvis.
Semina pauca, lanceolata, acuta, pilis tomentosis obsessa.
Empalement none.
Blossom. Six petals approaching together at the base, beneath lance-shaped
and pointed, the three outer ones spreading: the three inner ones upright,
with a pointed wide approaching border. All after impregnation stand
upright, like a cone.
Chives. Six threads broadly lance-shaped, pointed, and flat, with the points
turned inward. Tips oblong, and lying on them.
Pointal. Seed-bud above, nearly round, three-furrowed. Shaft thread-shaped,
upright. Summit blunt.
Seed-vessel. Capsule 3-lobed, 3-locular, 3-valved.
Seeds few, lance-shaped, pointed, and covered with downy hairs.
SPECIFIC CHARACTER.

Eriospermum foliis sub-cordatis, superne folia parva erecta linguæformia,

filamentis albis parvis obsessa, ferentibus. Flores spicati, laxi. Corolla lutea,
 viride striata.
Habitat in Caput Bonæ Spei.
Eriospermum with nearly heart-shaped leaves, bearing on their upper surface
little upright tongue-shaped leaflets beset with small white threads. Flowers
grow in a loose spike. Blossom yellow, striped with green.
Native of the Cape of Good Hope.
REFERENCE TO THE PLATE.
1. Chives and pointal.
2. A chive magnified.
3. Seed-bud and pointal.
4. Seed-bud cut transversely, magnified.
This curious Cape plant is not at present, we believe, in any other collection
in this kingdom than that of G. Hibbert, esq. where we first observed it in the
autumn of 1806. It was not then in bloom, but flowered the following
summer. It is by no means specious in its flowers, but very interesting in the
singularity of its foliage, whose uncommon structure is very distinct from
any plant we have ever seen. Mr. Knight, the botanic gardener, informs me
that it increases from the root, but not abundantly, and, like most Cape bulbs,
is in a dormant state during the latter part of autumn, at which time it should
be watered very sparingly. It appears rather impatient of having its roots
often disturbed: once in two or three years is necessary, not only to renew
the earth, but to take off any small bulbs it may have produced. It delights to
grow in a light loamy or peaty soil, and should stand in an elevated part of
the green-house, to enjoy a full circulation of air.
 PLATE DXXII.

P R O T E A A B R O TA N I F O L I A H I RTA .
Hairy Southernwood-leaved Protea.
CLASS IV. ORDER I.
TETRANDRIA MONOGYNIA. Four Chives. One Pointal.

ESSENTIAL GENERIC CHARACTER.

Corolla 4-fida, seu 4-petala. Antheræ lineares, petalis infra apices insertæ.
Calyx proprius, nullus. Semina solitaria.
Blossom four-cleft, or of four petals. Tips linear, inserted into the petals
below the points. Cup proper, none. Seeds solitary.
SPECIFIC CHARACTER.

Protea foliis bipinnatis, filiformibus, pilosis: floribus ramos terminantibus in

umbellis confertis: pedunculis brevissimis: bracteis erectis: corollis pallide
carneis. Stigmata nigra.
Habitat ad Caput Bonæ Spei.
Protea with doubly-winged leaves, thread-shaped, and hairy. Flowers
terminate the branches in crowded umbels. Footstalks very short. Floral
leaves upright. Blossoms of a pale flesh-colour. Summit of the pointal black.
Native of the Cape of Good Hope.
REFERENCE TO THE PLATE.
1. A flower-prop.
2. The chives spread open.
3. A chive magnified.
4. Seed-bud and pointal, summit magnified.
This hairy-leaved Protea resembles the P. abrotanifolia, Pl. 507, but is upon
examination very distinct. The flowers are of a pale rose colour, but have a
lively appearance from the contrasted blackness of the stigma. It is a round
bushy plant, flowering early in the autumn, requiring the same treatment as
the generality of those species with small divided leaves.
Our figure was made from a plant in the Hibbertian collection.
 PLATE DXXIII.

G O RT E R I A PAV O N I A .
Peacock Gorteria.
CLASS XIX. ORDER IV.
SYNGENESIA POLYGAMIA NECESSARIA. Tips united. Necessary Pointals.

ESSENTIAL GENERIC CHARACTER.

Receptaculum nudum. Pappus lanatus. Corolla radiata, lingulata. Calyx

monophyllus, squamis imbricatis tectus.
Receptacle naked. Down woolly. Blossom rayed, tongue-shaped.
Empalement one-leafed, covered with imbricated scales.
SPECIFIC CHARACTER.

Gorteria foliis pinnatis: foliolis æqualibus, ovatis, marginibus revolutis,

pilosis, subtus albis: petalis radii magnis, aurantiis, ad basin eleganter
notatis. Caulis herbaceus.
Gorteria with winged leaves. The leaflets are equal, ovate, rolled back at the
edges, hairy, and white beneath: petals of the ray large, of a gold-colour, and
elegantly marked at the base. Stem herbaceous.
REFERENCE TO THE PLATE.
1. The empalement.
2. One of the radiating petals.
3. The same shown from the under side.
4. A petal as it appears when rolled up.
5. A floret of the disk.
6. The seed-bud and pointal.
This new species of Gorteria stands foremost in the ranks of beauty whilst
expanded by the solar ray, whose absence is soon visible in the plant by the
rolling up of the petals; but on the following morn, when the sun’s beams
begin to warm the vegetable world, they again unfold themselves with
undiminished lustre, and so continue successively for near a fortnight.
Our drawing was made from a fine plant in the nursery of Mr. Harrison at
Brompton. We also observed it in bloom at Messrs. Colville’s; from whom,
to complete the dissections, we received a flower, which, although it had
been a week in bloom, continued to perform its diurnal evolutions (in a glass
of water) of rolling up and expanding for nearly a week longer—but only
from eleven till one in the day:—a shorter time, most probably owing to its
being kept in a room whose northern aspect prevented the exhilarating rays
of Phœbus from approaching. It was introduced from the Cape of Good
Hope by G. Hibbert, esq. about the year 1804, and considered as biennial.
 PLATE DXXIV.

LACHNÆA BUXIFOLIA.
Box-leaved Lachnæa.
CLASS VIII. ORDER I.
OCTANDRIA MONOGYNIA. Eight Chives. One Pointal.

ESSENTIAL GENERIC CHARACTER.

Calyx nullus. Corolla quadrifida; limbo inæquali. Semen unum, sub-

baccatum.
Cup none. Blossom four-cleft; border unequal. One seed, nearly berried.
SPECIFIC CHARACTER.

Lachnæa foliis ovatis, glabris, glaucis: floribus in capitulis globosis: corollis

albis, odoratis. Caulis teres, longissimus.
Habitat ad Caput Bonæ Spei.
Lachnæa with ovate, smooth, glaucous leaves. Flowers in globular heads.
Blossoms white, and sweet-scented. Stem round, and very long.
Native of the Cape of Good Hope.
REFERENCE TO THE PLATE.
1. A blossom spread open.
2. The seed-bud and pointal.
3. The flower-receptacle.
This fragrant species of Lachnæa is the L. buxifolia of Lamarck, and the
Gnidia filamentosa of Linnæus; but certainly not a Gnidia, as it wants the
four small inner petals, the distinguishing feature and most essential
distinction between those two genera.
Our figure delineates a plant in the conservatory of G. Hibbert, esq. that
was upwards of five feet high; and interspersed amongst some fine bushy
shrubs, its compact flowers and delicate glaucous foliage gave it a
picturesque appearance.
 PLATE DXXV.

P O D A LY R I A H I R S U TA .
Hairy Podalyria.
CLASS X. ORDER I.
DECANDRIA MONOGYNIA. Ten Chives. One Pointal.

ESSENTIAL GENERIC CHARACTER.

Calyx sub-bilabiatus, quinquefidus. Corolla papilionacea. Alæ vexilli

longitudine. Legumen ventricosum, polyspermum.
Empalement nearly bilabiate, five-cleft. Blossom butterfly-shaped. Wings the
length of the standard. Pod ventricose, and many-seeded.
SPECIFIC CHARACTER.

Podalyria foliis simplicibus, hirsutis, ovatis vel oblongis: corollis magnis,

purpureis, plerumque simplicibus: pedunculis longis: ramis teretibus, pilosis.
Podalyria with simple, hairy leaves, ovate or oblong. Blossoms large and
purple, mostly single. Footstalks long. Branches round and hairy.
REFERENCE TO THE PLATE.
1. The empalement.
2. The standard.
3. One of the wings.
4. The keel.
5. Chives and pointal.
6. The chives spread open.
7. Seed-bud and pointal.
Podalyria is a section of the genus Sophora, separated from it by Lamarck,
and named after the son of Æsculapius, the celebrated physician who
accompanied the Grecians in their famous expedition against Troy.
This species, we have little doubt, is the P. hirsuta (an unfigured species)
enumerated by Willdenow, although by some it is thought to be distinct from
it, on account of the leaves being somewhat longer, the flowers of a finer
colour; differences, we think, accounted for in the latitude of growth
resulting from varied modes of culture.
 Our drawing was made from a plant raised from Cape seed, by Messrs.
Whitley and Brames, in the year 1806.
 PLATE DXXVI.

PROTEA CESPITOSA.
Turfy Protea.
CLASS IV. ORDER I.
TETRANDRIA MONOGYNIA. Four Chives. One Pointal.

ESSENTIAL GENERIC CHARACTER.

Corolla 4-fida, seu 4-petala. Antheræ lineares, petalis infra apices insertæ.
Calyx proprius, nullus. Semina solitaria.
Blossom four-cleft, or of four petals. Tips linear, inserted into the petals
below the points. Cup proper, none. Seeds solitary.
SPECIFIC CHARACTER.

Protea foliis rigidis, lanceolatis, pilosis, undulatis, glabris, patentibus, apice

adscendente, supra convexis, infra concavis: capitulo globoso, terminali:
corollis ferrugineis: squamis pilosis, interne læte rubris. Caulis humilis.
Habitat ad Caput Bonæ Spei.
Protea with rigid, lance-shaped, hairy leaves, waved, smooth, and spreading,
with an ascending point, convex above, and concave beneath: head of
flowers globular, and terminal. Blossoms of a rusty colour. Scales hairy, and
of a bright red on the inside. Stem low.
Native of the Cape of Good Hope.
REFERENCE TO THE PLATE.
1. A flower complete.
2. Seed-bud and pointal.
This new dwarf Protea is named from its sod-or turf-like appearance.
Although of low and humble growth, it is by no means deficient in
attraction. The inner side of the imbricating scales is of a fine red, which is a
great addition to its beauty whilst expanded: but in our plant this was of
short duration, occasioned by the pressure of the leaves from the rapid
growth of the surrounding side shoots.
Our figure was made from the Hibbertian collection.
 PLATE DXXVII.

RUELLIA FULGIDA.
Bright-flowered Ruellia.
CLASS IV. ORDER I.
TETRANDRIA MONOGYNIA. Four Chives. One Pointal.

ESSENTIAL GENERIC CHARACTER.

Calyx 5-partitus. Corolla monopetala, limbo 5-lobo, inæquali. Stamina

biconjugata. Stylus filiformis. Stigma bifidum. Capsula dissepimentis
dentatis, elasticis, dehiscentibus. Semina pauca.
Empalement 5-parted. Blossom one petal: border 5-lobed, unequal. Chives by
pairs. Shaft thread-shaped. Summit two-cleft. Capsule with the partitions
toothed, elastic, and splitting. Seeds few.
SPECIFIC CHARACTER.

Ruellia foliis petiolatis, ovato-acuminatis, undulatis, pilosis, crenatis:

pedunculis axillaribus, cum multis floribus tubæformibus.
Ruellia with petiolated leaves ovately pointed, waved, hairy, and scolloped.
Footstalks axillary, with many long trumpet-shaped flowers.
REFERENCE TO THE PLATE.
1. The empalement.
2. A blossom spread open.
3. Seed-bud and pointal.
4. The capsule.
5. The same split open.
6. A ripe seed.
This new and beautiful species of Ruellia was introduced by Lord Seaforth
from the West Indies, and flowered in Mr. Lambert’s stove at Boyton, in
June 1807, for the first time in England; and continued, as he informs us, to
flower during the greatest part of the summer, ripening its seeds in
abundance, and being easily propagated by cuttings.
 PLATE DXXVIII.

O R N I T H O G A L U M E L AT U M .
Lofty Ornithogalum.
CLASS VI. ORDER I.
HEXANDRIA MONOGYNIA. Six Chives. One Pointal.

ESSENTIAL GENERIC CHARACTER.

Corolla 6-petala, persistens. Filamenta basi dilatata. Capsula 3-locularis.

Semina subrotunda, nuda.
Blossom 6-petalled, remaining. Threads widened at the base. Capsule 3-
celled. Seeds roundish and naked.
SPECIFIC CHARACTER.

Ornithogalum foliis lanceolatis: floribus in racemo longissimo crescentibus,

albis et parvis: staminibus longitudinem corollarum fere æquantibus.
Ornithogalum with lance-shaped leaves. Flowers grow on a very long spike,
are white and small. The stamens scarcely the length of the blossoms.
REFERENCE TO THE PLATE.
1. A petal and chive.
2. A chive shown from the outer side.
3. Seed-bud and pointal.
4. The same magnified.
This tall and delicate plant was introduced by J. M. Cripps, esq., who found
the roots in Egypt on the plains of Alexandria, near the spot where the
famous battle was fought in the year 1801; and from one which he planted in
his garden at Staunton in Sussex our drawing was made. It agrees in habit
with the Ornithogalum latifolium, but is perfectly distinct both in the
blossoms and foliage from that species. The plant which our figure
represents had already produced four side bulbs. It flowered in March last,
and appears to propagate freely.