Professor Carri Westgarth on companion animals' impact on child development
Professor Carri Westgarth, Chair in Human and Animal Interaction, University of Liverpool is an author on a recently published article on companion animals and child development outcomes in BMC Pediatrics.
Here she speaks to Dr Vanessa Ashall, HAI Technical Leader at Waltham Petcare Science Institute who funded the study, to explain its findings:
Tell us about the methodology of the study
We designed the study to assess the association between pet ownership and developmental outcomes in children such as emotional health, behavioural and cognitive development, language skills and educational attainment.
We used data from questionnaires and direct observations of 2 to 18 year old children from the Children of the 90s study (also known as Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children - ALSPAC), which tracked around 14,000 children born in 1991/92. Using well-designed longitudinal data and adjusting for confounders (other factors which may also affect the children’s outcomes) helped us to avoid biases and examine a range of outcomes.
Our study was designed to address gaps in our understanding of the impact of social relationships on childhood and adolescent health and wellbeing as previous studies have mainly focused on interactions between humans. We had an opportunity to build on the growing research into HAI and the impact of pet ownership, specifically adjusting for many potential confounders – where previous research has been limited.
What were the key findings?
We identified several important outcomes, outline below, supporting existing research relating to pet ownership and childhood development. We also identified some areas that require additional research to better understand the results.
Language development
We looked at a range of communication scores to assess language acquisition and development. One finding was that children with pets had a higher comprehension score at age five. This could suggest that owning animals may stimulate communication and vocabulary building within the home.
Our findings support previous observations that owning animals may facilitate language acquisition and the presence of dogs has also been shown to influence reading ability in school age children.
Prosocial behaviour
Owning a dog or ‘other type of pet’ (such as small furries or fish) was associated with improved positive social behaviours at age 3 such as sharing, co-operating and considering others.
Lower educational attainment
This was the first study to assess pet ownership and educational attainment. Interestingly, we found pet ownership was consistently linked to poorer educational attainment, across key milestones. We cannot draw definitive conclusions from this, and it requires further exploration.
Cognitive development
The study identified some behavioural problems among a small number of pet-owning children, such as greater hyperactivity in cat owners at age three. Rather than being causal, this may reflect families getting a pet to support children with developmental delays and neurodiversity.
Why is controlling for confounders like socioeconomic status and maternal mental health critical in this study?
External factors can confuse results significantly. For example, a child from a lower socioeconomic background might be less likely to have access to good educational resources, which could falsely attribute developmental difficulties to pet ownership. By adjusting for these factors, we can more accurately assess how pets contribute to child development.
What are the specific challenges you identified with this research method?
The main challenge was the complexity of the relationships between pets, children, and their families. It’s not always clear whether having a pet influences a child’s development, or whether families with certain characteristics, such as those with children experiencing developmental difficulties, are more likely to acquire pets in the first place. It is also worth noting that our observed effect sizes were mostly small and may not relate to clinically significant differences for individuals.
What do you think this study has added to our overall understanding of the significance of the human animal bond?
This study provides a more detailed understanding of how pets contribute to child development, especially in social skills and language. It has also raised some interesting areas for further exploration.
What other research methods do you think should be employed to help us build on this understanding further?
To build on our understanding, we would need to employ a range of additional research approaches such as in-depth interview or observational research or randomized controlled trials to unravel some of the complexity in the data and help determine causality. Longitudinal studies like this one are useful for observing trends over time. However, collecting more detailed data on the nature of children’s relationship with their pets—such as why they acquired a pet, time spent together and the quality of the relationship—would provide deeper insights into how and why pets influence child development.
What other gaps in HAI research do you think should be addressed as a priority?
I hope this study leads to more rigorous, longitudinal studies that explore specific developmental outcomes, across different companion animal species. This study opens the door for future research on educational and wellbeing interventions—where pets can be used not just for companionship, but as support for improving social interactions and skills in children and adults.