Pet Ownership and Social Isolation in China: Emotional Demand and Structural Constraints
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/4xe1gb80Keywords:
Pet Ownership, Social Exclusion, Companionship, Behavioral Constraints, Well-beingAbstract
As more people have started raising pets, there is now a growing sense of loneliness and social isolation among some, so some people believe that the desire for a pet may stem from this loneliness. However, this assumption does not explain why the emotional need for pets is not being met in practice; not all socially excluded individuals own pets. Based on the survey data of 294 people from all over China, this paper compares the perceptions of loneliness, well-being, living conditions and reasons for keeping pets among owners and non-owners in different areas in terms of household structure. According to the above data, although most people who have experienced social isolation wish to own a pet for emotional support, loneliness among these individuals is not strongly associated with pet ownership. Structural factors, such as residential mobility, household composition and time constraints, are more responsible for this phenomenon than other causes, and behavioural factors, including present bias and limited perceived behavioural control, further explain why emotional needs do not always result in ownership. Based on the above, an increase in the number of pets is not necessarily due to a rise in loneliness; instead, it may be related to emotional needs and structural limitations. Pets provide some emotional support for people lacking social interaction, but the desire for such companions is also economically limited.
Downloads
References
[1] McConnell, A. R., Brown, C. M., Shoda, T. M., et al. (2011). Friends with benefits: On the positive consequences of pet ownership. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(6), 1239–1252. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024506.
[2] Wood, L., Giles-Corti, B., & Bulsara, M. (2005). The pet connection: Pets as a conduit for social capital? Social Science & Medicine, 61(6), 1159–1173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. socscimed. 2005.01.017.
[3] Wood, L., Martin, K., Christian, H., et al. (2017). Social capital and pet ownership – A tale of four cities. SSM - Population Health, 3, 442–447. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j. ssmph. 2017. 05. 002.
[4] Antonacopoulos, N. M. D., & Pychyl, T. A. (2010). An examination of the potential role of pet ownership, human social support and pet attachment in the psychological health of individuals living alone. Anthrozoös, 23(1), 37–54. https: //doi. org/10.2752/175303710x12627079939143.
[5] Zhang, S., Wang, Q., Wang, X., et al. (2022). Pet ownership and cognitive frailty among Chinese rural older adults who experienced a social loss: Is there a sex difference? Social Science & Medicine, 305, 115100. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j. socscimed. 2022.115100.
[6] Yin, X., Morris, P. G., & Williams, J. M. (2025). Motivations for pet ownership among adolescents and emerging adults in China: A theory of planned behavior study. Anthrozoös, 38(6), 935–954. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2025.2509383.
[7] Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.
[8] Kahneman, D., & Thaler, R. H. (2006). Anomalies: Utility maximization and experienced utility. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1), 221–234. https://doi.org/10.1257/ 0895 33006776526076.
[9] Laibson, D. (1997). Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 443–478. https:// doi. org/10.1162/003355397555253.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Core Journal of Social Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
