Multidimensional Structure of the Factors Affecting the Success of the Relationship Between Humans and Domestic Animals

ISSN 2474-9397 American Journal of Fundamental, Applied & Experimental Research, 2018 / 4 (11)

MULTIDIMENSIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE FACTORS AFFECTING THE SUCCESS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HUMANS AND DOMESTIC ANIMALS

Vlasova O. Milyutina K. Lunov V. Dr.Sc. in Psychology, Dr.Sc. in Psychology, Ph.D., Dr.HC, Professor, Associate Professor, Professor of RANH, head of Department Department of developmental Member of APA, of developmental psychology psychology Member of AACP, Taras Shevchenko Kyiv Taras Shevchenko Kyiv Bogomolets natonal National University National University medical university Ukraine Ukraine Ukraine [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

The article contains the results of an empirical study of the factors influencing relations between owners and domestic animals – the place of animals in the family system, the influence of the level of subjective loneliness and the level of social support, the level of development of empathy, lifestyles, etc. on relationship styles. A typology of both owners and animals was discovered, regularities influencing the success of their interaction were revealed. As a result of the analysis of previous studies, the following theoretical model of factors that influence success of interaction between the owner and his pet was proposed. Keywords: animal in the human family, types of relationship, negative attitude, indifferent attitude, use of the animal, perception of the animal as an element of prestige, friendly attitude, attitude as to a child, emotional “unity”.

Стаття містить результати емпіричного дослідження чинників, що впливають на відносини власників та домашніх тварин – місце тварин у сімейній системі, вплив рівня суб›єктивної самотності та рівня соціальної підтримки, рівень розвитку емпатії, стиль життя тощо. Виявлено типологію як власників, так і тварин, вияв- лено закономірності, що впливають на успіх їхньої взаємодії. За результатами аналізу попередніх досліджень запропоновано модель факторів, що впливають на успіх взаємодії власника та домашньої тварини. Ключові слова: тварина в сім'ї людини, види відносин, негативне ставлення, байдуже ставлення, вико- ристання тварини, сприйняття тварини як елемента престижу, дружнє ставлення, ставлення як до дитини, емоційна «єдність».

During the last century, there has been an increase in the number of cats and dogs in urban apart- ments. They begin to be perceived not utilitarianly, but as companions and pets. At the same time, there are a growing number of problems associated with deviant relations between a man and an animal: homeless animals on the streets of the city, injuries in owners and strangers, a request for euthanasia of young, healthy but uncontrollable animals. The study of relations between animals and their owners be- gan not long ago (Knight, Herzog, 2009; Banks, Banks, 2002; Edwards, Beck, 2002; Millan, 2017). They were stimulated by a change in the attitude of a man to animals that lived next to him. Hal Herzog (Kazharskaya. 2011) drew attention to the fact that during the past history of mankind the utilitarian attitude towards domestic animals predominated, whereas in the XX and XXI centuries the attitude changed and the animal became a partner. Based on the theory of family systems, E.Yu. Fedorovich, A.Ya.Varga [1] consider the role of the animal in the human family and come to the conclusion that the concept of transgeneration trans- mission of ways of supporting the homeostasis of the family system explains why in some families pets are

90 American Journal of Fundamental, Applied & Experimental Research, 2018 / 4 (11) ISSN 2474-9397 involved in such cases, but not in others. Noteworthy for the explanation is the fact that the number of families, which are breeding pets in recent years is growing rapidly in all industrialized countries. They can “support” the family at all stages of its life cycle, as we wrote in the previous chapter (Milyutina, 2015). A thorough theoretical-methodological and empirical study, conducted by A.V. Nikolskaya, shows that the interspecific groups “man-pet” are formed under certain necessary and sufficient conditions. Re- lationships in interspecific groups are determined by certain ecopsychological types of interaction, depending on which in such groups mental phenomena of trust, attachment, dominance structure, formation and adoption of norms and rules of behavior of group members in relation to each other, and interspecific communication are formed. Somewhat different is the concept of A.N. Mychko (Mychko, Sotskaya, Belenkiy, Zhuravlev, 2004) which draws attention to the role of the process of socialization of a dog in the formation of relations between a man and an animal. This study is devoted to identifying the factors that determine the success of human interaction with domestic pets. We identified the following factors for the success of interaction: - Individual-typological features of the animal: species, breed, type of higher nervous activity, personal experience of the animal; - Individual-typological features of the owner: the type of higher nervous activity, motivation, level of tolerance, level of development of emotional intelligence, the leading system of perception; - The attitude of a person to a domestic animal, which, in turn, is due to the attitude to animals in society, mythological and fantastic ideas about a particular kind of animals, personal experience of communicating with pets; - Type of upbringing, which is used by the owner while communicating with the animal. Based on the results of conducted pilot studies on 43 pairs of owners and service dogs (sheep dogs), it was revealed that the greatest success of interaction was observed when a greater strength of higher nervous activity was combined in the owner than in the dog. When combined in the “reverse” direction, the strength of higher nervous activity is greater in sheep-dog than in the owner, deviations occurred in the form of insufficient obedience and controllability of dogs. But the worst combination was the coincidence of the strength of higher nervous activity of the owner and the dog, because in such dyads, status relationships were slowly and unreliably established. The mobility indices of higher nervous activity, on the contrary, in the case of coincidence, contributed to the establishment of relations, and the mismatch of tempo-rhythmic characteristics complicated the process of joint activity. The motivation for keeping the pet also plays a role when combined with the species and breed of the animal: the need for an obedient guard will not be satisfied with the presence of a British cat, and the elderly person who wants to get the animal – companion will have difficulty communicating with the mobile and unpredictable -fer ret. One of the important components of the optimization of relations is the level of personal tolerance of the owner, his idea of whether the needs and motives of the animal’s behavior can not coincide with the human. Insufficient level of tolerance leads to an underestimation of the mental abilities of the animal, or, conversely, anthropomorphism when trying to understand the animal. Emotional intelligence allows you to clearly recognize the emotional state of another person. One can put forward the hypothesis that a developed emotional intellect will contribute to understanding not only human, but also animal emotional manifestations. The predominant type of perception (visual, auditory, kinesthetic) affects the selection of the animal. The kind of interaction which the owner likes – watch, touch, stroke, talk and listen to purring, depends on this. The concept of the effectiveness of human-animal interaction requires a separate study. The signs of this, in our opinion, can be, first of all, the security of this interaction both for man and for the animal, emotional satisfaction from communication, conformity of expectations and the result obtained. With further research, the content of this concept is specified more precisely. An empirical study of this problem is planned. Several groups of subjects took part in it: adults who did not have animals now, but who had them earlier – 50 respondents; owners of cats and dogs – 88 respondents; breeders, experts (cynologists and veterinarians) – 20 respondents. With the help of in-depth interviews, we were able to identify the level of safety and satisfaction of the owners by the relationships with their pets, the state of health and the normative behavior of the animals. At this stage of the empirical study, standardization and approbation of author techniques and modifications of standard tests take place.

91 ISSN 2474-9397 American Journal of Fundamental, Applied & Experimental Research, 2018 / 4 (11) To study the typology of animals, questionnaires for owners and expert assessments were used. Individual-typological features of the owners were investigated with the help of a tepping-test, a modification of the “Index of Tolerance” by G.W. Soldatova, in-depth interviews, the methodology of emotional intelligence research by Emin Lyusinov, and its modification in recognition of the emotional states of animals. Attitude to the animal was studied using the author’s technique “Types of relations” and the types of upbringing were studied by modifying the Eidemiller technique. At a later stage, a comparative study of the effect of the identified factors on relationships with tamed animals (ferrets, rats) will be conducted. On the basis of the theoretical research, four groups of factors of the success of the relationship in the system of “owner-household pet” were revealed. It is possible to put forward a hypothesis that relations are influenced by individual and typological features of animals and owners, the attitude of the owner to the animal, the type of education of the pet. Further empirical studies of each of these factors are planned, development and testing of diagnostic tools is underway. As a result of the analysis of scientific and applied publications and interviewing owners, breeders and veterinarians, another questionnaire was developed. It is not intended to study the level of responsibility of the owner, but to understand the type of attitude towards pets in general, among different respondents, regardless of whether they have a pet or not (Milyutina, 2014; Milyutina, 2014). The form for filling out and the text of the questionnaire is given below. Age______Owner ______Not owner ______Breeder ______Vet ______1. Cats (dogs) are the source of infection. 2. I do not understand why people get cats or dogs. 3. A cat must catch mice. 4. I am going to get a thoroughbred cat or a dog with a pedigree. 5. I like to play and communicate with my cat (dog). 6. I like to “nurse” a cat or a dog. 7. We understand each other without words. 8. Cats (dogs) spoil, gnaw, and scratch everything they can only get. 9. If my friends have a pet, then I do not care. 10. The dog should live in a booth in the village. 11. My cat (dog) participates in exhibitions and win. 12. It does not matter which breed a cat (a dog) is, it is important that we get along with it. 13. Cats (dogs) are kind and naive creatures. 14. My cat (dog) always feels my mood. 15. Animals can’t live in the house. 16. There is no benefit from cats or dogs in the modern city. 17. There must be some benefit from the pet. 18. I buy beautiful clothes and decorations for my cat (dog). 19. A dog, first of all, is a friend of a man. 20. The cat (dog) should be looked after as a child. 21. I always know what my cat (dog) wants. 22. Cats and dogs are dangerous for children. 23. The best animal is the computer “Tamagotchi”. 24. A cat should not eat well, then it will not want to catch mice. 25. Everyone admires my cat (dog) and envies me. 26. A cat (dog) can always cheer me up and comfort me. 27. Cats (dogs) must be brought up and trained. 28. If I have pain, a cat (a dog) comes to cure me. 29. Stray dogs (cats) cause me fear and disgust. 30. I have never got pets and do not intend to do it. 31. The dog should get the rest of the food; you should not buy a special food or cook for it. 32. I aspire to have my cat (dog) ideally matched the breed standard. 33. Children, when dealing with cats or dogs, learn friendship and responsibility. 34. Other people say that I pamper my cat (dog) too much. 35. You can’t achieve such unity with a man like with a cat (a dog).

92 American Journal of Fundamental, Applied & Experimental Research, 2018 / 4 (11) ISSN 2474-9397 We can distinguish the following types of relationship: negative, indifferent, use of the animal,- per ception of the animal as an element of prestige, friendly attitude, attitude as to a child, emotional “unity”. The questionnaire consists of 35 statements; the evaluation of each type is from zero to five points. An empirical study of the system of interaction between people and their pets was conducted. 125 respondents belonging to several groups were examined: people do not keep any animals at home (32 subjects), owners of cats (50 subjects), owners of dogs (18 subjects), 18 respondents had both cats and dogs, there were also 7 owners, who had parrots. In our study, a tendency was found to display early childhood experiences with animals in adulthood. Those people who had animals in their childhood most- ly brought them in adulthood, and preferred animals of the same biological species. Owners of animals were met among those people who did not have children’s experience with animals. Only three persons were in deviant relationships with their animals, all of them had no experience of dealing with animal in childhood. Normative relations were distributed in the following way: friendly relations prevailed (67%), pa- rental-children (23%), only 8% were in “working” utilitarian relations and 2% could not formulate their type of relationship. It was interesting that the owners of both cats and dogs or two or more dogs of different breeds described that they had different types of relationships depending on the species and breed of the animal. The age of the subjects was from 18 to 49 years, women predominated (73% of the subjects). According to the results of the empirical study, the polarization of the attitude towards animals was revealed depending on the age of the subjects: in respondents older than 40 years, a negative attitude toward domestic pets and violation of emotional boundaries is significantly more likely than among the young people. We can distinguish the following types of relationship: negative, indifferent, use of the animal,- per ception of the animal as an element of prestige, friendly attitude, attitude as to a child, emotional “unity”. The questionnaire consists of 35 statements; the evaluation of each type is from zero to five points. 1. Negative 2. Indifferent 3. Using 4. Prestige 5. Friendship 6. Attitude as to a child 7. Unity The pragmatic attitude towards animals was significantly more frequent among the inhabitants of villages and small towns than among the inhabitants of Kiev. Types of deviant relations were defined on the basis of expert assessments and content analysis of expert texts: veterinarians, cynologists, and felinologists. Criteria for violation of relationships are, first of all, a danger to humans or animals, as well as the high level of discomfort and stress that arises in these relationships. The following are the signs of deviant relations: 1) doghunting – the desire for physical destruction of dogs, 2) cruel treatment of animals, 3) failure to provide the animal with appropriate veterinary care, which leads to suffering and pre- mature death of the animal, 4) insufficient consideration of the physiological and social needs of the animal, 5) irresponsible behavior (uncontrolled reproduction of animals, throwing them outside), 6) uncontrolled behavior of the animal, dangerous for humans – when it bites, jumps, 7) uncontrolled behavior of the animal is unpleasant for a person – the habit of gnawing and scrat- ching furniture, gnawing shoes, damaging shoes and clothing. In the frequency analysis of complaints of deviant relations on the part of animal owners, veterinarians, cynologists and felinologists, the following picture of the distribution of deviant relationships was distinguished: see Table 1. In total, 1536 statements were analyzed in social networks of the correspon- ding direction. When the criterion χ² was used, the reliability of the disagreements in the positions of the studied groups to the behavior disorders at the level of 0.05 was revealed. In the group of veterinarians, the greatest activity was observed in reactions to deviant attitudes – 484 utterances.

93 ISSN 2474-9397 American Journal of Fundamental, Applied & Experimental Research, 2018 / 4 (11) Table 1 Frequency distribution of complaints about violations of relations

Violations Veterinarians Owners Cynologists Felinologists Doghunting 4 15 3 0 Cruel treatment 45 12 27 7 Failure to provide assistance 116 64 32 13 Failure to consider needs 214 21 62 123 Irresponsibility 94 43 103 106 Dangerous behavior 5 22 112 3 Unpleasant behavior 6 148 41 95

Professional activity increases attention to untimely appeal for veterinary care and neglect of animal needs – feeding inappropriate food, poor conditions of keeping. In the group of owners of animals (both cats and dogs), complaints of unpleasant behavior of animals and search for advice on this matter prevail, the group of rat owners pays more attention to the irresponsibility of the owners and the failure to provide rats with the appropriate veterinary care. The group of cynologists actively discusses cur- rent trends in the training of dogs; they are concerned with the combination of irresponsibility of animal owners who do not pay enough attention to the education of pets and aggressive manifestations of deviant behavior of dogs, methods of correction. The opposite picture in the group of felinologists – they are concerned about the neglect of the needs of cats, the irresponsibility of the owners, and accordingly the unpleasant behavior of animals. There are these variants of violations in the following types of relations: - “openly hostile” – doghunting, - “dominant” – cruel treatment by a person, dangerous behavior of an animal, - “object” – failure to provide appropriate assistance, irresponsibility, not taking into account the needs of the animal, and accordingly – uncontrolled unpleasant or even dangerous behavior. A separate variant of object relations is the creation of “shelters” in an apartment in the conditions of congestion, unsanitary keeping. The emergence of deviant manifestations and deviant types of relationships is influenced by factors both from the animal side and from the human side. Cynologists and veterinarians distinguish the following reasons for deviant relationships arising from reasons of the animal: - genetic disorders of the animal’s nervous system; - insufficient socialization of animals (adult wild dog or cat, forced to live in a city apartment); - animal disease. But most often it is human behavior that causes a deviant type of relationship, among the factors that can be identified are cognitive, motivational, emotional and behavioral. Cognitive factors of deviant relations include low awareness of the owners about the psychophysio- logy of animals, inadequate knowledge of the first signs of diseases, the rules of care, the rules for building adequate relationships. The wrong motivation for getting a pet belongs to the group of motivational factors: “it was presented as a gift”, “it was brought for a child – let it play”, “this is a fighting breed – everyone should respect me”, “it is fashionable to go to clubs with a dog ...”. Emotional factors are both the owner’s own emotional instability and a low level of recognition of the animal’s emotional states. Behavioral disorders are often the result of all the previous factors, but can arise independently of them, when the owner does not cons- ciously fix the inadequate behavior of the animal due to lack of experience and attention. In accordance with the proposed theoretical model, there is a need to develop a new psychodiag- nostic toolkit. A separate study requires the concept of the effectiveness of human-animal interaction. The signs of this, in our opinion, can be, first of all, the security of this interaction both for a man and for an animal, emotional satisfaction from communication, conformity of expectations and the result obtained. With further research, the content of this concept was specified more precisely. An empirical study of this problem has been carried out. Several groups of subjects took part in it: adults who do not have animals now,

94 American Journal of Fundamental, Applied & Experimental Research, 2018 / 4 (11) ISSN 2474-9397 but who had them earlier – 50 respondents; owners of cats and dogs – 88 respondents; breeders, experts (cynologists and veterinarians) – 20 respondents – at the stage of development and standardization of methods. With the help of in-depth interviews, we were able to identify the level of safety and satisfaction of the owners with the relationships with their pets, the state of health and the normative behavior of the animals. At this stage of the empirical study, standardization and approbation of author techniques and modifications of standard tests take place. A questionnaire was developed with the help of which it was possible to identify the parameter “Responsible attitude to the animal”. 1. My animal has never bitten or scratched the owner. 2. My cat (dog) often scratches furniture, spoils shoes. 3. My animal takes food only from its owners. 4. If I give freedom to my animal, it immediately uses it to harm itself or others. 5. My cat (dog) picks up and gnaws everything. 6. My dog walks on the street with a leash and a muzzle. 7. I do not forget to vaccinate it in time and “run out” worms from my animal. 8. My cat (dog) does not bite and does not scratch strangers. 9. I must warn the guests that my animal can bite or scratch them. 10. Sometimes I am afraid of my cat or dog. 11. My cat (dog) is too stupid, it is easier to clean, than to accustom them to the tray (or to walk). 12. It often happens this way: I try to drive a cat (dog) from somewhere, and then stop and calm down. 13. If you stay in the company of my cat (dog), you can get very tired. 14. Training animals is a hard and ungrateful work. You give everything to them, but in return you do not get anything. 15. My cat is safely accustomed to the tray, and the dog to walk. 16. My cat (dog) is absolutely useless animals. 17. I never envy those who live without pets. 18. The presence of an animal in the house brightens my life and makes it easier. 19. I’m glad that my cat (dog) is waiting for me at home. 20. I like to communicate with my cat (dog). 21. My cat (dog) is often sick. 22. I always give the cat (dog) tasty pieces, although I understand that it is harmful. 23. There are cases when the best punishment is a good beating. 24. A good word helps me little with my cat (dog). The only remedy is constant strict punishment. 25. Many times I had to miss vaccinations and examinations with a veterinarian. 26. I try to give the most suitable food to my cat (dog). 27. I almost always have time to talk and play with my cat (dog). 28. My cat (dog) does not have to wait for me for a long time. 29. My animal feels comfortable and peaceful in the house. 30. My animal has its favorite place in the house, from where no one drives it out. For each positive answer to questions 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19, 21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, and for each negative answer to questions 2, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20, 23, 24, 25. In analyzing the distribution of the relationship to pets, a normal distribution curve was observed among 500 subjects, but the ratio varied significantly, depending on the sex and place of residence of the respondents. The worst (5.6 points) it was for men living in rural areas, the best (25.8 points) – for young women, and women of large cities. This confirms our assumption that the animal has been perceived as part of the family system relatively recently and the rules of non-violent communication, respect for animal rights are not yet obvious for our respondents. Modification of the Eidemiller method allowed studying in depth the attitude towards the animal as a member of the family system. In this technique, it was possible to identify the following scales. The level of care in the upbringing process (T + i T scales) It is about how much effort, attention, time the owners give to the upbringing of the animal. There are three levels of caring of the owners: normative, excessive and inadequate. • Excessive concern (T scale +). With this type of relationship, the owners devote an extremely long time, effort and attention to the animal, and the upbringing of it has become the central business of their life.

95 ISSN 2474-9397 American Journal of Fundamental, Applied & Experimental Research, 2018 / 4 (11) • Insufficient care (scale T -). The situation in which the pet is at the periphery of the owners’ attention, “hands do not reach”, the owners “do not care for it”. The animal often falls out of their eyes. They take care of it only from time to time, when something serious happens. This type of upbringing is especially dangerous in the dogs of fighting breeds. The degree of satisfaction of the animal’s needs (scales P + i P) It is about the extent to which the activities of the owners are aimed at satisfying the needs of animals, both materially-domestic (in nutrition, timely vaccination, treatment), and social – primarily in communicating with people, in their love and attention. This feature of upbringing is fundamentally different from the level of care, since it characterizes not the measure of employing the owners by educating the pet, but the degree of satisfaction of its needs. The so-called “hard training” is an example of a high level of care (since the owner does a lot of education) and a low level of satisfaction of the animal’s needs. There are two deviations in the degree of satisfaction of needs. • lost (scale P +). We talk about connivance in those cases when owners are striving for maximum and uncritical satisfaction of any animal needs. They “pamper” it. Any desire is a law for them. Explaining the need for such education, the owners argue with the help of a typical rationalization – “it looks at me”, its exclusivity, the desire to give it what the master likes. Typical statements are given in the scale P +. With connivance, the owners unconsciously project their previously unsatisfied needs on animals and seek ways of substituting their satisfaction at the expense of irrational food, unnecessary procedures (coloring wool, clothes, weddings). • Ignoring the needs of the animal (scale P). This style of education is characterized by an inadequate desire of the owners to meet the needs of the animal. At the same time, social needs suffer, especially the need for emotional contact, communication with a person. Perhaps inadequate nutrition, lack of vaccination and inadequate veterinary care are possible too. Requirements to a pet are an integral part of the educational process. They act, firstly, in the form of duties of animals – guarding the house, hunting mice and the like. Secondly, these are prohibitions, establishing what the animal should not do. Finally, non-compliance of the requirements by animals can entail the imposition of sanctions on the part of the owners – from mild condemnation to severe punishment. Redundancy of requirements (scale В +). Requirements to the animal in this case are very large, exorbitant, do not correspond to its capabilities as a biological species and breed and do not contribute to the full development of its individuality, but increase the possibility of animal neurotization. • Lack of requirements (scale B-). In this case, the animal does not perform the functions inherent to species and breed; people begin to demand the behavior inherent to decorative dogs from service or hunting dogs. The presence of an appropriate system of prohibitions ensures safety in communication with the animal, the comfort of living together. • Redundancy of prohibitions (scale C +). In this situation, the animal can’t do anything. It is presented with a huge number of prohibitions that limit its freedom and independence. In animals with a strong type of higher neurotic activity, such upbringing provokes aggressive reactions; in animals with a weak type of higher neurotic activity it causes the development of anxiety and distrust towards a person. Typical utterances of the owners reflect their fear of any manifestations of the animal’s independence, its “uncontrollability”. This fear manifests in a sharp exaggeration of the consequences, which can lead to even a slight violation of the prohibitions. This type of disrupted education is especially dangerous for cats and dogs of hunting breeds. Insufficiency of prohibitions for the animal (scale C-). In this case, the animal can do everything. Even if there are any prohibitions, the animal easily violates them, knowing that the owner will not punish it. The animal spoils furniture, takes food from the table, bites and scratches family members, whereas the owner “can’t do anything about it”. With this type of education, the animal becomes dangerous both for humans and for other animals. Especially inadmissible this type of education is for large service breeds of dogs. Severity of sanctions (penalties) for violation of requirements by animals (C + and C- scales). • Redundancy of sanctions (C + scale) (type of education – “hard treatment”). Commitment of severe punishments, excessive response to even minor violations of behavior is characteristic for the owners. Typical utterances of the owners reflect the desire to dominate at any cost, a low understanding of the needs of the animal.

96 American Journal of Fundamental, Applied & Experimental Research, 2018 / 4 (11) ISSN 2474-9397 • Minimization of sanctions (scale C-). These masters prefer either to avoid punishments at all, or use them very rarely. They hope for encouragement, doubt the effectiveness of any punishment, but sometimes reward the animal for the right behavior. This type can be quite effective for cats and hunting breeds of dogs. Instability of the upbringing style (scale H). By such education we mean a sharp change in the style of methods, representing a transition from a very strict to a liberal one or vice versa, the transition from increased attention to the animal to the phase of emotional rejection by the master. The owners, as a rule, recognize the fact of minor fluctuations in the upbringing of the animal, but underestimate the scope and frequency of these fluctuations and do not associate this with abnormalities in the behavior of the animal. This situation often occurs in families, in which the animal is involved in triangulation between family members, and aggression or tenderness is directed to the animal instead of a person who actually has caused these feelings. Expansion of the sphere of feelings (RRCH scale). Incorrect perception of the role of animals in the family system, or traumatic situations brought by the master lead to the transfer of feelings and demands from a person to an animal. Very often the owner does not clearly realize that he wants a cat or a dog to become something more than just an animal for him. The owners want it to satisfy at least some of the needs that in a normal family should be satisfied in the psychological relations of the spouses – the need for mutual exclusive attachment, in part – emotional needs. There is an aspiration to give “all feelings and all love” to the animal. This psychological attitude manifests indirectly, particularly in utterances that she needs no one except her cat and in the characteristic opposition of her ideal relations with the animal, as opposed to unsuccessful relations with her husband. Prevailing perception of children’s features in the animal (PDK scale). In this case, the owners have a tendency to ignore the fact of rapid growing of the animal, to sti- mulate it to preserve such childish qualities as immediacy, naivety, playfulness. The manifestations of pu- berty of the animal are encountered unexpectedly for such owners. They do not understand the changes in behavior, ignore them, or perceive them as “ill-mannered”. This type of violations contributes to the irresponsibility of the owners; they do not sterilize animals in time, “play” with puppies and kittens and throw them out into the street as they grow up. Phobia of pet loss (FU scale). “Weakness” of the owner is increased insecurity, fear of mistaking, exaggerated ideas about the “fragility” of the animal, its soreness, etc. It may occur in people who had no experience with animals in their childhood, or those who had a negative experience of the death of a pet. Another source is severe disease of the animal, if it has lasted long. The attitude of the owner to the animal was formed under the influence of fear of loss. Studies with the help of this technique were conducted selectively, only in those subjects who complained of problems in interaction with their pets. The use of this technique has made it possible to elucidate the psychological component of disturbed relationships. In the empirical study of the interaction of owners and pets, 76 women aged between 28 and 53 took part. 15 respondents had no domestic animals, 31 respondents kept from one to three cats at home, 14 persons had dogs of different breeds, there were also 26 owners of cats and dogs at the same time. All respondents underwent a number of methods: I.Karler test, aimed at the study of respondents’ satisfaction with their functioning in various spheres of human life activity. A multidimensional scale of social support (M.S.P.S.S.), which was developed by Zimet, and adapted for the Ukrainian sample was used. Features of perception of emotions by cats and dogs were also investigated. To do this, we used tables showing the conditions of pets that were created on the basis of the research by K. Lorenz and P. Leyhausen. As a result of the study, it was revealed that the overall level of social frustration was low in all respondents. There were no significant differences between a group of respondents who had pets and those who lived without them. Thus, our hypothesis that the level of social frustration causes a compensatory reaction in the form of communication with animals has not been confirmed, at least in the group of socially adapted and low-frustrated people. When examining the differences between groups in terms of the level of social support, it was found that according to the Mann-Whitney criterion, the level of social support in subjects with animals was significantly higher (at the level of 0.05) than in the subjects without animals. Probably, the personality

97 ISSN 2474-9397 American Journal of Fundamental, Applied & Experimental Research, 2018 / 4 (11) features, in particular the level of social intelligence and empathy, promotes the search for pleasure from communicating with pets and with people. The study of the compensatory function of pets should be con- tinued on other groups of subjects – the elderly people with a low level of social support. Deviants with personality disorders. Healthy and socially adapted respondents do not perceive relations with animals as compensation. On the contrary, there was a tendency (without reaching the level of reliable correlated connection) that the higher social support, the higher the level of indicators by the method “Responsible attitude to the animal”. To recognize the emotions of animals, the following stimulus material was used (Fig.1, Fig.2).

Fig.1. The main emotions of cats

When studying the level of recognition of cats’ emotions, a high level of their recognition was revealed in all respondents. It was the best in the owners of cats, significantly worse in owners of cats and dogs and in persons who did not have animals. This can be explained by the fact that owners of pets during interspecific communication unconsciously train the skills of recognizing emotional reactions of animals. The owners of cats and dogs at the same time were somewhat less aware of the emotions of cats, as it was discovered during interviews; they lived in private houses and perceived cats as utilitarian.

Fig. 2. The main emotions of dogs

98 American Journal of Fundamental, Applied & Experimental Research, 2018 / 4 (11) ISSN 2474-9397 Recognition of the emotions of dogs also had its own specificity depending on the group of owners. As one might have guessed, the owners of dogs and cats recognized their emotions better. Those respondents who did not have pets at all recognized emotions worse. Analysis of the distribution of levels of recognition of animals’ emotional states by types of emotions revealed the following: the respondents successfully recognized the manifestations of dog aggression, and perceived the “reconciliation signals” worse, the anxious states of cats were recognized more successfully than the aggressive states. Significant Mann-Whitney correlation at 0.05 between the “Responsible attitude to the animal” indicators and the quality of emotion recognition and a reliable level of correlation between the indicator of the level of empathy and the recognition of emotions was noted in the respondents. At the same time, there was no reliable relationship between empathy and a responsible attitude towards the animal. We can conclude that the content of pets is not compensatory (at least among a socially adapted group of respondents). But subjects who had pets had a more positive attitude to themselves and the environment and a lower level of psychoemotional anxiety. The content of pets is not compensatory. Perhaps in the presence of a pet, a more positive attitude to oneself and to others arises, which contributes both to the successful search for social support and to communication with pets. Interaction in the interspecies community is successful and contributes to overcoming the psychological strain provided that the emotional states of animals are adequately perceived. Conclusions As a result of the study, a multidimensional structure of the factors affecting the success of the relationship between humans and domestic animals was revealed. 1) As a result of joint evolution, both natural and artificial selection of dogs and cats took place on the basis of friendliness towards people. People also evolved in the direction of understanding the body’s signals and animal sounds, which are the biological prerequisites for organizing joint activities. 2) In culture, images of pets are presented in fairy tales and legends. Projections of images of the collective unconscious (both positive and shadow) contribute to the notion of animals. These unconscious projections are woven into modern representations and expectations from relationships with domestic animals. 3) Internet space and modern culture widely use images of cats and dogs in the form of positive and negative heroes of comics, cartoons, and Internet memes. An idea is formed about intelligent, faithful, caring dogs, funny and cunning cats. Owners use the Internet space to create groups and share information about their relationship with animals. The Internet helps spread modern trends in the education of animals. 4) Over the past decades, the attitude towards dogs has shifted from the utilitarian to the perception of the animal as part of the family system. Principles of training have changed from mechanical obedience, through the theory of domination to training on positive reinforcement. Actively studied behavioral medicine of cats and dogs, the system of their interaction with people and other animals is investigated. The idea of raising the ideal animal companion, satisfying the emotional and social needs of man is gra- dually spreading. 5) As a result of our research, questionnaires have been developed that study the level of responsible attitude to the animal, the type of relationship, the specificity of the owner’s motivation. It has been found that the responsible attitude to the animal is associated with a high level of empathy, social support, adequate motivation of the owner. The appearance of a pet plays a different role depending on the stages of family development and can serve as an indicator of crisis and conflict relations. 6) The prospect of further research is the elucidation of cultural factors and personal characteristics of the owners, influencing the type of relationship to the animal. References: Askew, G. (2002). Problemy povedeniya sobak i koshek [Problems of behavior of dogs and cats]. Moscow: Akvarium. Banks, Marian R., Banks, William A. (2002). The effects of animal-assisted therapy on loneliness in an elderly population in long-term care facilities. Journals of Gerontology: Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, Vol 57A (7), 428-432. Edwards, Nancy E., Beck, Alan M. (2002). Animal-assisted therapy and nutrition in Alzheimer’s disease. Western Journal of Nursing Research, Vol 24(6), Special issue: Human-Animal Interaction, 697-712. Kazharskaya, O. (2011). Moya sobaka dominiruyet? [Does my dog dominate?]. Izdatelstvo Dogfrend Pa- blishers.

99 ISSN 2474-9397 American Journal of Fundamental, Applied & Experimental Research, 2018 / 4 (11) Knight, S., Herzog, H. (2009). New Perspectives on Human-Animal Interactions: Theory, Policy and Research Paperback. Wiley-Blackwell. Millan, Cesar; Melissa Jo Peltier. (2017). Cesar Millan’s Lesson’s from the Pack: Stories of the Dogs Who Changed My Life. Retrieved from livelib.ru: https://www.livelib.ru/author/338701-tsezar-millan. Milyutina, K.L. (2014). Metody diahnostyky stosunkiv mizh vlasnykamy ta yikh domashnimy ulyublentsyamy [Methods of diagnosing relationships between owners and their pets].Naukovyy visnyk Khersonskoho derzhavnoho universytetu, 2, 2, 46-51. Milyutina, K.L. (2015). Typolohiya normatyvnykh ta deviantnykh stosunkiv mizh vlasnykamy ta yikh domashnimy ulyublentsyamy [Typology of normative and deviant relations between owners and their pet animals]. Naukovyy visnyk Khersonskoho derzhavnoho universytetu, 2, 1, 52-57. Milyutina, K.L. (2014). Chynnyky uspishnosti vzayemodiyi vlasnykiv tvaryn ta yikh domashnikh ulyublentsiv [Factors of the success of the interaction of the owners of animals and their pets]. Problemy suchasnoyi psykholohiyi, 1 (5), 84-89. Mychko, Ye.N., Sotskaya, M.N., Belenkiy, V.A., Zhuravlev, Yu.V. et al. (2004). Povedeniye sobaki [Dog behavior]. Moscow: OOO «AKVARIUM PRINT».

100