Published

2019-07-01

Diferencias de Género en Distintas Dimensiones del Vínculo Humano-Perro: Estudio Descriptivo en Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires

Gender Differences in Diverse Dimensions of the Human-Canine Bond: A Descriptive Study in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires

Diferenças de Gênero em Distintas Dimensões do Vínculo Humano-Cão: Estudo Descritivo em Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v28n2.72891

Keywords:

antrozoología, animal de compañía, diferencias de género, mascota, vínculo humano-animal (es)
anthrozoology, companion animal, gender differences, pet, human-animal bond (en)
animal de companhia, animal de estimação, antrozoologia, diferenças de gênero, vínculo humano-animal (pt)

Downloads

Authors

  • Marcos Díaz Videla Universidad de Flores
  • María Alejandra Olarte Universidad de Flores

Las mujeres parecen presentar más respuestas de afecto positivo hacia los animales. Sin embargo, hombres y mujeres refieren tener un vínculo intenso con sus mascotas. Los estudios sobre el tema han recibido diversos cuestionamientos. Considerando esto, se realizó un estudio descriptivo que comparó hombres y mujeres adultos custodios de perros (n=425) en tres grupos etarios (i.e., jóvenes, mediana edad y mayores), en seis dimensiones relacionales (i.e., interacción, cercanía emocional, costos, antropomorfismo, voluntad de adaptación y beneficios). Las mujeres mostraron mayores puntajes de cercanía emocional y antropomorfismo. Además, solo los hombres jóvenes mostraron mayor percepción de costos que las mujeres jóvenes. No se observaron diferencias en las demás dimensiones de acuerdo con el sexo del custodio. Se discute la significancia de los resultados considerando algunos aspectos sociocognitivos potencialmente implicados.

 

Cómo citar este artículo:

Díaz Videla, M., & Olarte, M. A. (2019). Diferencias de género en distintas dimensiones del vínculo humano-perro: estudio descriptivo en Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires. Revista Colombiana de Psicología, 28, 109- 124. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v28n2.72891

Women seem to show more positive affection responses toward animals. However, men and women reported having an intense bond with their pets. Studies on the topic have been questioned for different reasons. Taking this into account, a descriptive study was carried out, comparing adult male and female dog-owners (n=425) belonging to three age groups (i.e., young, middle-aged, and seniors), in six relational dimensions (i.e., interaction, emotional closeness, costs, anthropomorphism, will to adapt, and benefits). Women scored higher in emotional closeness and anthropomorphism. Only young men showed a greater perception of costs than young women. No differences were observed regarding the sex of the dog-owner in the other dimensions. The article discusses the significance of the results, considering some potentially involved socio-cognitive aspects.

 

How to cite this article:

Díaz Videla, M., & Olarte, M. A. (2019). Gender Differences in Diverse Dimensions of the Human-Canine Bond: A Descriptive Study in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires. Revista Colombiana de Psicología, 28, 109- 124. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v28n2.72891

As mulheres parecem apresentar mais respostas de afeto positivo aos animais. Contudo, homens e mulheres referem ter um vínculo intenso com seus animais de estimação. Os estudos sobre o tema vêm recebendo diversos questionamentos. Nesse sentido, foi realizado um estudo descritivo que comparou homens e mulheres adultos donos de cães (n=425) em três grupos etários (jovens, idade média e mais velhos), em seis dimensões relacionais (interação, aproximação emocional, custos, antropomorfismo, vontade de adaptação e benefícios). As mulheres mostraram maiores pontuações de aproximação emocional e antropomorfismo. Além disso, somente os homens jovens mostraram maior percepção de custos que as mulheres jovens. Não foram observadas diferenças nas demais dimensões de acordo com o sexo do dono. Foi discutida a significância dos resultados considerando alguns aspectos sociocognitivos potencialmente implicados.

References

Al-Fayez, G., Awadalla, A., Templer, D. I., & Arikawa, H. (2003). Companion animal attitude and its family pattern in Kuwait. Society & Animals, 11, 17-28. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853003321618819

Amiot, C. E., & Bastian, B. (2017). Solidarity with animals: Assessing a relevant dimension of social identification with animals. plos one, 12, e0168184. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168184

Blazina, C., & Kogan, L. (Eds.). (2016). Men and their dogs: A new understanding of man’s best friend. Nueva York, EUA: Springer.

Bodson, L. (2000). Motivations for pet-keeping in Ancient Greece and Rome: A preliminary survey. En A. L. Podberscek, E. S. Paul, & J. A. Serpell (Eds.), Companion animals and us: Exploring the relationships between people and pets (pp. 27-41). Cambridge, Reino Unido: Cambridge University Press.

Boya, U. O., Dotson, M. J., & Hyatt, E. M. (2012). Dimensions of the dog-human relationship: A segmentation approach. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 20, 133-143. https://doi.org/10.1057/jt.2012.8

Cain, A. O. (1985). Pets as family members. Marriage & Family Review, 8, 5-10.

Cohen, S. P. (2002). Can pets function as family members? Western Journal of Nursing Research, 24, 621-638. https://doi.org/10.1177/019394502320555386

Daly, B., & Morton, L. L. (2003). Children with pets do not show higher empathy: A challenge to current views. Anthrozoös, 16, 298-314. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279303786992026

Díaz Videla, M. (2016). La relación humano-perro de compañía: Estudio descriptivo en Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires (Tesis doctoral. Universidad de Flores). Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Díaz Videla, M. (2017). Antrozoología y la relación humano-perro. Buenos Aires: Irojo.

Díaz Videla, M., & Olarte, M. A. (2016). Animales de compañía, personalidad humana y los beneficios percibidos por los custodios. PSIENCIA. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencia Psicológica, 8, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.5872/psiencia.v8i2.201

Díaz Videla, M. (2018). El vínculo humano-perro y la socialización masculina. En M. Díaz Videla & M. A. Olarte (Eds.), Antrozoología, multidisciplinario campo de investigación (pp. 89-111). Buenos Aires, Argentina: Editorial Akadia.

Dotson, M. J., & Hyatt, E. M. (2008). Understanding dog–human companionship. Journal of Business Research, 61, 457-466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.07.019

Dwyer, F., Bennett, P. C., & Coleman, G. J. (2006). Development of the Monash Dog Owner Relationship Scale (mdors). Anthrozoös, 19, 243-256. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279306785415592

Fatjó, J., Darder, P., Calvo, P., Bowen, J., & Bulbena, A. (2013). Is dog ownership the same for men and women, parents and non-parents? Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 4, e44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2013.04.059

Franken, R. E., Hill, R., & Kierstead, J. (1994). Sport interest as predicted by the personality measures of competitiveness, mastery, instrumentality, expressivity, and sensation seeking. Personality and Individual Differences, 17, 467-476. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(94)90084-1

Hernández-Sampieri, R., Fernández-Collado, F., & Baptista, P. (2010). Metodología de la investigación. Bogotá, Colombia: McGraw Hill.

Herzog, H. A. (2007). Gender differences in human animal interactions: A review. Anthrozoös, 20, 7-21. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279307780216687

Hills, A. M. (1993). The motivational bases of attitudes toward animals. Society & Animals, 1, 111-128. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853093X00028

Hinde, R. A. (1976). On describing relationships. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 1-19.

Hinde, R. A. (1987). Individuals, relationships and culture: Links between ethology and the social sciences. Cambridge, Reino Unido: Cambridge University Press.

Hosey, G., & Melfi, V. (2014). Human-animal interactions, relationships and bonds: A review and analysis of the literature. International Journal of Comparative Psychology, 27, 117-142.

Kidd, A. H., & Kidd, R. M. (1985). Children’s attitudes toward their pets. Psychological Reports, 57, 15-31.

Kring, A. M., & Gordon, A. H. (1998). Sex differences in emotion: expression, experience, and physiology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 686. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.3.686

Mallon, G. P. (1993). A study of the interactions between men, women, and dogs at the ASPCA in New York City. Anthrozoös, 6, 43-47. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279393787002376

Marx, M. B., Stallones, L. B., Garrity, T. F., & Johnson, T. P. (1988). Demographics of pet ownership among US adults 21 to 64 years of age. Anthrozoös, 2, 33-37. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279389787058262

McBride, A. (1995). The human-dog relationship. En I. Robinson (Ed.), The Waltham book of human–animal interactions: Benefits and responsibilities of pet ownership (pp. 99-112). Oxford, Reino Unido: Pergamon.

McConnell, A. R., Brown, C. M., Shoda, T. M., Stayton, L. E., & Martin, C. E. (2011). Friends with benefits: On the positive consequences of pet ownership. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 1239. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024506

Melson, G. F., & Fogel, A. F. (1996). Parental perceptions of their children’s involvement with household pets: A test of a specificity model of nurturance. Anthrozoös, 9, 95-106. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279396787001545

Melson, G. F., Peet, S., & Sparks, C. (1991). Children’s attachment to their pets: Links to socio-emotional development. Children’s Environments Quarterly, 8, 55-65.

Miura, A., Bradshaw, J. W., & Tanida, H. (2000). Attitudes towards dogs: A study of university students in Japan and the UK. Anthrozoös, 13, 80-88. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279300786999860

Montero, I., & León, O. G. (2007). A guide for naming research studies in psychology. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 7, 847-862.

Nagasawa, M., Mitsui, S., En, S., Ohtani, N., Ohta, M., Sakuma, Y., ... & Kikusui, T. (2015). Oxytocin-gaze positive loop and the coevolution of human-dog bonds. Science, 348, 333-336. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1261022

Palmer, R., & Custance, D. (2008). A counterbalanced version of Ainsworth’s strange situation procedure reveals secure-base effects in dog–human relationships. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 109, 306-319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2007.04.002

Parslow, R. A., Jorm, A. F., Christensen, H., Rodgers, B., & Jacomb, P. (2005). Pet ownership and health in older adults: Findings from a survey of 2,551 community-based Australians aged 60–64. Gerontology, 51, 40-47. https://doi.org/10.1159/000081433

Patronek, G. J. (1999). Hoarding of animals: An under-recognized public health problem in a difficult-to-study population. Public Health Reports, 114, 81.

Paul, E. S. (2000). Love of pets and love of people. En A. L. Podberscek, E. S. Paul & J. A. Serpell (Eds), Companion animals and us: Exploring the relationships between people and pets (pp.168-186). Cambridge, Reino Unido: Cambridge University Press.

Poresky, R. H., & Daniels, A. M. (1998). Demographics of pet presence and attachment. Anthrozoös, 11, 236-241. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279398787000508

Prato-Previde, E., Custance, D. M., Spiezio, C., & Sabatini, F. (2003). Is the dog-human relationship an attachment bond? An observational study using Ainsworth’s strange situation. Behaviour, 140, 225-254. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853903321671514

Prato‐Previde, E., Fallani, G., & Valsecchi, P. (2006). Gender differences in owners interacting with pet dogs: an observational study. Ethology, 112, 64-73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.2006.01123.x

Ramirez, M. (2006). “My dog’s just like me”: Dog ownership as a gender display. Symbolic Interaction, 29, 373-391. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.2006.29.3.373

Rehn, T., Lindholm, U., Keeling, L., & Forkman, B. (2014). I like my dog, does my dog like me? Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 150, 65-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2013.10.008

Reid, J. S., & Anderson, C. E. (2009). Identification of demographic groups with attachments to their pets. In Annual Conference of the American Society of Business and Behavioral Sciences (Febrero, 2009), Las Vegas, EUA.

Serpell, J. A. (1996). In the company of animals: A study of human-animal relationships. Cambridge, Reino Unido: Cambridge University Press.

Serpell, J. A. (2011). Human-dog relationships worldwide. Dog Population Management, 15, 49-56.

Serpell, J. A. (2016). History of companion animals and the companion animal sector. Companion Animal Ethics, 1, 8-23.

Serpell, J. A., & Paul, E. (2011). Pets in the family: An evolutionary perspective. En C. A. Salmon, & T. K. Shackelford (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of evolutionary family psychology (pp. 298-309). Oxford, Reino Unido: Oxford University Press.

Stallones, L., Marx, M. B., Garrity, T. F., & Johnson, T. P. (1988). Attachment to companion animals among older pet owners. Anthrozoös, 2, 118-124. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279389787058127

Starrels, M. E. (1994). Gender differences in parent-child relations. Journal of Family Issues, 15, 148-165.

Stevens, L. T. (1990). Attachment to pets among eighth graders. Anthrozoös, 3, 177-183. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279390787057522

Topál, J., Miklósi, Á., Csányi, V., & Dóka, A. (1998). Attachment behavior in dogs (Canis familiaris): A new application of Ainsworth’s (1969) Strange Situation Test. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 112, 219-229. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.112.3.219

Walsh, F. (2009). Human-animal bonds i: The relational significance of companion animals. Family Process, 48, 462-480. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.2009.01296.x

Wells, D. L., & Hepper, P. G. (1997). Pet ownership and adults’ views on the use of animals. Society & Animals, 5, 45-63. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853097x00213

Williams, J. M., Muldoon, J., & Lawrence, A. (2010). Children and their pets: Exploring the relationships between pet ownership, pet attitudes, attachment to pets and empathy. Education and Health, 28, 12-15.

Wollrab, T. I. (1998). Human-animal bond issues. Journal of American Veterinary Medical Association, 212, 1675.

How to Cite

APA

Díaz Videla, M. & Olarte, M. A. (2019). Diferencias de Género en Distintas Dimensiones del Vínculo Humano-Perro: Estudio Descriptivo en Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires. Revista Colombiana de Psicología, 28(2), 109–124. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v28n2.72891

ACM

[1]
Díaz Videla, M. and Olarte, M.A. 2019. Diferencias de Género en Distintas Dimensiones del Vínculo Humano-Perro: Estudio Descriptivo en Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires. Revista Colombiana de Psicología. 28, 2 (Jul. 2019), 109–124. DOI:https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v28n2.72891.

ACS

(1)
Díaz Videla, M.; Olarte, M. A. Diferencias de Género en Distintas Dimensiones del Vínculo Humano-Perro: Estudio Descriptivo en Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires. Rev. colomb. psicol. 2019, 28, 109-124.

ABNT

DÍAZ VIDELA, M.; OLARTE, M. A. Diferencias de Género en Distintas Dimensiones del Vínculo Humano-Perro: Estudio Descriptivo en Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires. Revista Colombiana de Psicología, [S. l.], v. 28, n. 2, p. 109–124, 2019. DOI: 10.15446/rcp.v28n2.72891. Disponível em: https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/psicologia/article/view/72891. Acesso em: 10 mar. 2026.

Chicago

Díaz Videla, Marcos, and María Alejandra Olarte. 2019. “Diferencias de Género en Distintas Dimensiones del Vínculo Humano-Perro: Estudio Descriptivo en Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires”. Revista Colombiana De Psicología 28 (2):109-24. https://doi.org/10.15446/rcp.v28n2.72891.

Harvard

Díaz Videla, M. and Olarte, M. A. (2019) “Diferencias de Género en Distintas Dimensiones del Vínculo Humano-Perro: Estudio Descriptivo en Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires”, Revista Colombiana de Psicología, 28(2), pp. 109–124. doi: 10.15446/rcp.v28n2.72891.

IEEE

[1]
M. Díaz Videla and M. A. Olarte, “Diferencias de Género en Distintas Dimensiones del Vínculo Humano-Perro: Estudio Descriptivo en Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires”, Rev. colomb. psicol., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 109–124, Jul. 2019.

MLA

Díaz Videla, M., and M. A. Olarte. “Diferencias de Género en Distintas Dimensiones del Vínculo Humano-Perro: Estudio Descriptivo en Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires”. Revista Colombiana de Psicología, vol. 28, no. 2, July 2019, pp. 109-24, doi:10.15446/rcp.v28n2.72891.

Turabian

Díaz Videla, Marcos, and María Alejandra Olarte. “Diferencias de Género en Distintas Dimensiones del Vínculo Humano-Perro: Estudio Descriptivo en Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires”. Revista Colombiana de Psicología 28, no. 2 (July 1, 2019): 109–124. Accessed March 10, 2026. https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/psicologia/article/view/72891.

Vancouver

1.
Díaz Videla M, Olarte MA. Diferencias de Género en Distintas Dimensiones del Vínculo Humano-Perro: Estudio Descriptivo en Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires. Rev. colomb. psicol. [Internet]. 2019 Jul. 1 [cited 2026 Mar. 10];28(2):109-24. Available from: https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/psicologia/article/view/72891

Download Citation

CrossRef Cited-by

CrossRef citations4

1. Juliana Andrea Chaparro Eulegelo, Diego Ferney Patarroyo Gutiérrez, Lina María Bastidas Orrego. (2025). Caracterización del gasto asociado a la tenencia de mascotas en las familias urbanas de Yopal, Colombia. Accounting and Management Research, 4, p.20. https://doi.org/10.22209/amr.v4a03.2025.

2. Eduardo Barona Collado, Pedro Tomé Martín, Olga Campos Serena. (2023). Mapping Human–Animal Interaction Studies: A Bibliometric Analysis. Anthrozoös, 36(1), p.137. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2022.2084994.

3. Camilo Guarín Patarroyo, Alfredo Giraldo Londoño, Yener Muñoz Orozco. (2025). Estudio retrospectivo de la casuística canina en dos clínicas veterinarias de Cali, Colombia (2023). Revista Colombiana de Ciencia Animal - RECIA, 17(2), p.e1168. https://doi.org/10.24188/recia.v17.n2.2025.1168.

4. James-Ariel Sánchez-Alzate. (2022). Consumo de los cuidadores de mascotas del Valle de Aburrá, Colombia, antes, durante y después del aislamiento obligatorio por COVID-19. Innovar, 33(87), p.11. https://doi.org/10.15446/innovar.v33n87.105499.

Dimensions

PlumX

Article abstract page views

2211

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

License

Copyright (c) 2019 Revista Colombiana de Psicología

The RCP is published under the Creative Commons license and can be copied and reproduced according to the conditions of this license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5). RCP articles are available online at https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/psicologia/issue/archive. If you would like to subscribe to the RCP as reader, please go to https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/psicologia/information/readers and follow the instructions mentioned in the webpage. Additionally, a limited number of print journals are available upon request. To request print copies, please email revpsico_fchbog@unal.edu.co.