How Attached Are You to Your Pet?
Family member, confidant, or a cause - what your animal is to you
Two people can both say they love their dog and mean very different things. For one, the dog is part of the household and the best moment of the day. For the other, the dog is the one they talk to when they cannot talk to anyone else. The scale this test is based on found three strands in attachment to pets, and your mix of them says something about you as well as about the animal.
Before you start There are no right answers. Pick what is usually true for you, not what sounds best.
Answer about the animal you live with now. If you have none at the moment, think of the most recent one.
What it measures
The three subscales of the Lexington scale: general attachment (how much your animal matters in daily life), people substituting (how far the animal takes a role people might otherwise fill, such as confidant or comfort), and attitudes to animal welfare and rights. It is about your bond with an animal, not your attachment style with people, which is a separate test.
Based on: Lexington Attachment to Pets Scale (Johnson, Garrity & Stallones, 1992)
Possible results
General attachment
How much your animal matters in your everyday life.
People substituting
How far your animal fills roles that people might otherwise fill.
Animal welfare
How strongly you believe animals deserve protection and moral consideration.
Common questions
Do pets really make people healthier and happier?
The evidence is more mixed than the headlines. Herzog reviewed the research in 2011 and found that alongside studies showing owners doing better, others found no difference or even worse outcomes, and that owners differ from non-owners in many ways that could explain the gaps. His conclusion was that a general pet effect is a hypothesis, not a fact - which does not stop a particular animal mattering a great deal to a particular person.
Is it unhealthy to prefer my pet's company to people's?
Not in itself. Preferring an animal on a bad day is common and can be soothing, because the animal does not judge or ask questions. It becomes worth thinking about when the animal is the only source of comfort, and when that is because contact with people has quietly faded rather than because you chose it. In that case the bond is not the problem, but it may be covering one.
Is grieving a pet as real as grieving a person?
It is real, and for strongly attached owners it can be intense. What often makes it harder is that other people treat it as minor, so the grief goes unacknowledged. The strength of your general attachment score is a reasonable guide to how hard a loss is likely to hit, and it is sensible to allow yourself the time you would allow for any significant loss.
Sources
- Johnson, T. P., Garrity, T. F., & Stallones, L. (1992). Psychometric evaluation of the Lexington Attachment to Pets Scale (LAPS). Anthrozoös. doi:10.2752/089279392787011395
- Herzog, H. (2011). The impact of pets on human health and psychological well-being: Fact, fiction, or hypothesis?. Current Directions in Psychological Science. doi:10.1177/0963721411415220
An honest note The items are Quinthea's own wording adapted from the Lexington Attachment to Pets Scale, so scores are not comparable to published norms. The scale was developed in the United States, and later validation studies in other countries have not cleanly reproduced its three-part structure. The popular idea that pets make owners healthier is, as Herzog argued, still unproven. This is not a diagnosis; if the loss of an animal leaves you struggling for months, talking to someone helps.