Dog guardians and genetic testing: Survey textbox responses & human-animal bond influences

IF 2
Nikki E. Bennett, Suzanna Soto, Jhobany Nicolas-Serrano, P. Gray
{"title":"Dog guardians and genetic testing: Survey textbox responses & human-animal bond influences","authors":"Nikki E. Bennett, Suzanna Soto, Jhobany Nicolas-Serrano, P. Gray","doi":"10.1079/hai.2023.0020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Research has yet to evaluate how direct-to-consumer genetic services for companion animals may influence the human–animal bond (HAB). US-based Wisdom Panel\n TM\n customers were invited to complete an online survey to evaluate dog guardians who had used a genetic test for their dogs. This paper presents a subset of that data in which participants provided qualitative responses and answered Likert scale questions related to genetic test use and the HAB. Our sample consisted of 253 participants who completed the HAB questions, with 126 completing one or both open-ended text box questions. Qualitative responses were deductively coded using a codebook from a previous content analysis on pet genetic company website and consumer review data. Responses to HAB Likert items indicated genetic test results allow guardians to learn more about their dog, a benefit promoted by pet genetic companies, but did not suggest the new genetic knowledge influenced their sentiments toward the tested dog. Central themes found in qualitative responses were participants using the test results to interpret their dog’s breed or other types of information (e.g. biological relatives in the Wisdom Panel database). Other themes were participants discussing their perceptions toward their dog’s test results (e.g. perceived accuracy of the results) and sharing information about their dog to give additional context to their experience of using a genetic test (e.g. dog acquisition history). Follow-up research should further explore the potential impacts companion animal genetic services may have on the HAB and utilize these findings as a framework. These lines of inquiry will especially be pertinent with the growing use of genetic services for companion animals and genetic researchers suggesting genomic technologies may be used to enhance HAB.\n","PeriodicalId":146997,"journal":{"name":"Human-Animal Interactions","volume":"85 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human-Animal Interactions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1079/hai.2023.0020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research has yet to evaluate how direct-to-consumer genetic services for companion animals may influence the human–animal bond (HAB). US-based Wisdom Panel TM customers were invited to complete an online survey to evaluate dog guardians who had used a genetic test for their dogs. This paper presents a subset of that data in which participants provided qualitative responses and answered Likert scale questions related to genetic test use and the HAB. Our sample consisted of 253 participants who completed the HAB questions, with 126 completing one or both open-ended text box questions. Qualitative responses were deductively coded using a codebook from a previous content analysis on pet genetic company website and consumer review data. Responses to HAB Likert items indicated genetic test results allow guardians to learn more about their dog, a benefit promoted by pet genetic companies, but did not suggest the new genetic knowledge influenced their sentiments toward the tested dog. Central themes found in qualitative responses were participants using the test results to interpret their dog’s breed or other types of information (e.g. biological relatives in the Wisdom Panel database). Other themes were participants discussing their perceptions toward their dog’s test results (e.g. perceived accuracy of the results) and sharing information about their dog to give additional context to their experience of using a genetic test (e.g. dog acquisition history). Follow-up research should further explore the potential impacts companion animal genetic services may have on the HAB and utilize these findings as a framework. These lines of inquiry will especially be pertinent with the growing use of genetic services for companion animals and genetic researchers suggesting genomic technologies may be used to enhance HAB.
狗监护人和基因检测:调查文本框响应和人-动物关系的影响
研究还没有评估伴侣动物直接面向消费者的基因服务如何影响人类与动物的关系。总部位于美国的Wisdom Panel TM客户被邀请完成一项在线调查,以评估为他们的狗使用基因测试的狗监护人。本文提出了该数据的一个子集,其中参与者提供了定性反应,并回答了与基因测试使用和HAB相关的李克特量表问题。我们的样本包括253名完成了HAB问题的参与者,126名完成了一个或两个开放式文本框问题。定性的回答是演绎编码使用从以前的内容分析宠物基因公司网站和消费者评论数据的代码本。对HAB Likert项目的回应表明,基因测试结果可以让监护人更多地了解他们的狗,这是宠物基因公司推广的一个好处,但并没有表明新的基因知识影响了他们对被测试狗的感情。在定性回答中发现的中心主题是参与者使用测试结果来解释他们的狗的品种或其他类型的信息(例如智慧小组数据库中的生物亲属)。其他主题是参与者讨论他们对狗的测试结果的看法(例如,感知结果的准确性),并分享有关他们的狗的信息,以提供他们使用基因测试的经验的额外背景(例如,狗的获得历史)。后续研究应进一步探索伴侣动物遗传服务可能对赤潮的潜在影响,并利用这些发现作为框架。这些研究方向将与越来越多地使用伴侣动物的遗传服务和遗传研究人员提出的基因组技术可能用于增强赤潮化有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书