Simone B Sidel, Jaci Gandenberger, Kerry Murphy, Kevin N Morris
{"title":"Recognizing and Mitigating Canine Stress in Human-Canine Interaction Research: Proposed Guidelines.","authors":"Simone B Sidel, Jaci Gandenberger, Kerry Murphy, Kevin N Morris","doi":"10.3390/ani15111665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The research into human-canine interactions (HCIs) has grown substantially, yet limited attention has focused on the welfare of canines involved, particularly pet dogs owned by volunteer participants. To address this gap, we conducted a secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial, examining canine welfare during an acute human stress protocol. Our methodology incorporated evidence-based screening tools, environmental modifications, researchers trained in canine behavior assessments and safe interactions, and canine stress monitoring using the Fear Free™ Canine Fear, Anxiety, and Stress (FAS) Spectrum. Dogs' stress levels showed a non-significant increase from the rest to stressor phase (0.80 to 1.00, <i>p</i> = 0.073) and a significant decrease during recovery (1.00 to 0.48, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Only two dogs (7.6%) required withdrawal due to elevated stress levels, though these levels remained within acceptable safety parameters. The peak stress remained within acceptable limits, with only 24% (6 of 25) reaching an FAS score of two during the TSST. By final recovery, 96% of dogs achieved FAS scores of zero to one (Green Zone), indicating relaxed states. Salivary collection proved challenging, highlighting limitations in low-invasive physiological measurement techniques. Based on our findings and literature review, we propose standardized guidelines for HCI research, including thorough pre-screening, environmental preparation, researcher training, stress-monitoring protocols, and informed consent procedures emphasizing withdrawal rights. These guidelines aim to establish ethical standards for this rapidly expanding field, protecting canine participant welfare while enabling valuable research to continue.</p>","PeriodicalId":7955,"journal":{"name":"Animals","volume":"15 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12153650/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Animals","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ani15111665","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The research into human-canine interactions (HCIs) has grown substantially, yet limited attention has focused on the welfare of canines involved, particularly pet dogs owned by volunteer participants. To address this gap, we conducted a secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial, examining canine welfare during an acute human stress protocol. Our methodology incorporated evidence-based screening tools, environmental modifications, researchers trained in canine behavior assessments and safe interactions, and canine stress monitoring using the Fear Free™ Canine Fear, Anxiety, and Stress (FAS) Spectrum. Dogs' stress levels showed a non-significant increase from the rest to stressor phase (0.80 to 1.00, p = 0.073) and a significant decrease during recovery (1.00 to 0.48, p < 0.001). Only two dogs (7.6%) required withdrawal due to elevated stress levels, though these levels remained within acceptable safety parameters. The peak stress remained within acceptable limits, with only 24% (6 of 25) reaching an FAS score of two during the TSST. By final recovery, 96% of dogs achieved FAS scores of zero to one (Green Zone), indicating relaxed states. Salivary collection proved challenging, highlighting limitations in low-invasive physiological measurement techniques. Based on our findings and literature review, we propose standardized guidelines for HCI research, including thorough pre-screening, environmental preparation, researcher training, stress-monitoring protocols, and informed consent procedures emphasizing withdrawal rights. These guidelines aim to establish ethical standards for this rapidly expanding field, protecting canine participant welfare while enabling valuable research to continue.
AnimalsAgricultural and Biological Sciences-Animal Science and Zoology
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
16.70%
发文量
3015
审稿时长
20.52 days
期刊介绍:
Animals (ISSN 2076-2615) is an international and interdisciplinary scholarly open access journal. It publishes original research articles, reviews, communications, and short notes that are relevant to any field of study that involves animals, including zoology, ethnozoology, animal science, animal ethics and animal welfare. However, preference will be given to those articles that provide an understanding of animals within a larger context (i.e., the animals'' interactions with the outside world, including humans). There is no restriction on the length of the papers. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical research in as much detail as possible. Full experimental details and/or method of study, must be provided for research articles. Articles submitted that involve subjecting animals to unnecessary pain or suffering will not be accepted, and all articles must be submitted with the necessary ethical approval (please refer to the Ethical Guidelines for more information).