After returning home after a long day of stress, many people's first reaction is to pet their pets for some comfort. However, a recent study from the Netherlands shows that such an approach may not always help relieve stress, especially in cats. Studies have found that interacting with pets, whether cats or dogs, is associated with improved mood within a short period of time. However, dogs and cats are not of much help when it comes to reducing stress. Cats may even further "amplify" your stress when you are already in a bad mood.
This study was published in the journal "Frontiers in Psychology". The research team used a mobile phone application to track the daily life of pet owners in real time for five consecutive days (including non-working days). Notifications were sent about ten times a day, allowing participants to provide immediate feedback on whether they were interacting with their pets at the time, what their current mood was, and how stressed they felt (the owner's stress was assessed, not the state of the pet). In the data analysis, the researchers found that interactions with pets were correlated with short-term mood improvements, and that this "mood-boosting" effect was not significantly different between cats and dogs; but contrary to popular imagination, these interactions did not significantly reduce the owners' stress levels. More subversively, the data suggests that when the owner is in a higher state of stress, the presence of a cat may actually make the subjective sense of stress stronger, while dogs "neither help nor hurt" in reducing stress.
However, the author also admitted that the conclusions of this study still have many limitations and should not be over-interpreted. First of all, in terms of sample composition, there are 75 dog owners and only 36 cat owners. The comparison between cats and dogs is not balanced and the statistical power is limited. Secondly, in order to pursue “real-time, natural” data, the research chose to collect information in real-life scenarios. Although this improved the ecological validity of the results, it also made the data more “noisy”. In order to be statistically "clean", the researchers had to eliminate situational records in which cats and dogs were present at the same time. However, in real multi-pet households, the emotional impact is likely to come from the combined effects of multiple pets rather than a single species. More and more detailed research is still needed in the future to dismantle this complex interaction.
The research also points to a key point that is often overlooked: the quality and type of interactions between people and pets are likely to have very different effects on mood and stress. This experiment used a simplified single-question questionnaire to measure variables such as "whether you are interacting with pets." Although it shortened the answering time and was conducive to collecting multiple rounds of real-time data, it also meant that the researchers could not distinguish between a warm hug, a gentle pat and a caress, or just a distant glance. The lack of detailed interaction information prevents the study from further determining which specific interaction methods enhance mood or affect stress.
From the perspective of animal behavior, cats and dogs also have completely different "occupational divisions" in the history of co-evolution with humans. During the long process of domestication, dogs were mainly bred to cooperate with humans and were strongly selected for traits that make it easier to establish close relationships with humans. Cats, on the other hand, were initially domesticated to control pests such as rats and mice, and experienced relatively less artificial selection. Therefore, their personalities and behaviors still retain many shadows of wild cats—especially solitary, territorial wild cats. Many cat owners can understand this: sometimes cats will take the initiative to get close to you, curl up on your lap and purr; other times, they will flick their tails and walk away coldly. Relevant research also shows that humans are often not good at detecting the subtle signals cats send when they are unhappy, and even in dogs, humans are not always reliable in their ability to identify anxiety or discomfort.
At the same time, pets themselves also have obvious "personality differences". Just like humans, they can be cold or clingy, lively or quiet. Attachment theory in animal psychology believes that an individual's early attachment experience will affect his or her relationship with others (or pets) in adulthood, and the interaction between the personality and attachment style of the owner and pet will change the interaction and emotional feedback of both parties. Therefore, even if it is the same "petting a cat" or "walking a dog", the actual psychological effects may be very different between different families and different individuals. The results of this study also remind us that we cannot simply use "it is better to keep cats or dogs" to judge which pet is more beneficial to emotional health across the board.
Although this study provides a more cautious and even slightly "cold water" conclusion on the stress-reducing effects of cats and dogs, from a larger historical perspective, humans using animals to improve mental health is not new. Animal-assisted therapy has been used in the fields of mental health and emotion regulation since the 18th century, and numerous repeated studies have confirmed that establishing stable interactive relationships with animals can promote human happiness and subjective health. However, what this study emphasizes is that the real key may not be "whether to keep a pet", but "how to get along with pets." When a cat voluntarily lies on your lap and takes a nap, and when a dog patiently stays by your side, your stress may indeed be relieved; but if the pet is unwilling to be disturbed, but the human forcefully "hugs and kisses", this "misplaced interaction" is likely to be counterproductive and make both parties more nervous.
The authors of the article, Jody Raybold, a lecturer in psychology at Coventry University, and Daniel Waldeck, an assistant professor of psychology, pointed out that for people who hope to use pets to improve their mood or reduce stress, a more realistic approach is to treat animals as independent individuals with their own emotions and boundaries, rather than as comfort tools that can be "emotionally withdrawn" at any time. Understanding and respecting the behavioral characteristics and communication signals of pets and creating a stable and safe interactive atmosphere may be more conducive to long-term emotional regulation and mental health than "rushing to catch a cat or dog when you are highly nervous".