Pandemic Pets Failed to Boost Owner Well-Being Long-Term

Despite widespread belief that pets improve human happiness and reduce loneliness, a comprehensive study of nearly 3,000 people during COVID-19 lockdowns found no lasting benefits from pet ownership.

Researchers at Eötvös Loránd University tracked participants over six months and discovered that while getting a new pet initially increased cheerfulness, this effect vanished within 1-4 months. More surprisingly, dog owners actually experienced declines in calmness, activity, and life satisfaction over time.

The findings, published in Scientific Reports, challenge popular assumptions about the “pet effect” and suggest that the emotional benefits of animal companionship may be far more limited than commonly believed, especially during stressful periods.

Short-Lived Joy, Long-Term Challenges

“Through a collaboration with a psychologist team led by Zsolt Demetrovics and Róbert Urbán, we had access to a unique data set,” explained Enikő Kubinyi, head of the MTA-ELTE ‘Momentum’ Companion Animals Research Group. During Hungary’s 2020 lockdowns, researchers tracked 2,783 people across three data collection periods, noting that 65 participants acquired pets while 75 lost them.

The research design offered a rare opportunity to study unbiased participants—people who weren’t necessarily devoted pet lovers or primary caregivers, unlike most previous studies that focused on enthusiastic adopters visiting animal shelters.

Key findings from the longitudinal study revealed:

• Initial cheerfulness boost lasted only 1-4 months after pet acquisition
• Dog owners showed decreased calmness, activity, and life satisfaction over time
• Pet loss had no measurable impact on former owners’ well-being
• Neither mental nor physical health predicted future pet acquisition decisions

The results proved particularly striking for dog ownership. While acquiring any pet briefly increased cheerfulness, dog owners specifically experienced significant decreases in multiple well-being measures as months passed.

Loneliness Persisted Despite Pet Companionship

“What surprised me most was that a new pet in the household had no effect on the respondents’ loneliness,” noted Judit Mokos, data scientist and first author of the study. “Dog adoption is often promoted as a solution for elderly and/or lonely people. Shelters and pet food companies promote adoption as a means of alleviating loneliness.”

However, the research revealed a more complex reality. Rather than reducing loneliness, dogs appeared to increase anxiety among new owners. This finding contradicts widespread marketing messages and social assumptions about pets serving as emotional support during difficult times.

The study’s timing during COVID-19 lockdowns provided an ideal natural experiment. If pets were going to demonstrate clear psychological benefits, the researchers reasoned, it would be during a period of extreme social isolation and stress when people were confined to their homes.

Unbiased Sample Reveals Different Reality

Previous pet research has typically suffered from selection bias, focusing on people already committed to animal ownership or those actively seeking to adopt. This study’s strength lay in examining a representative sample where participants weren’t necessarily the primary pet caregivers and held varying attitudes toward animals.

Study co-author Ádám Miklósi emphasized this crucial distinction: “We rarely have access to data that documents spontaneous pet acquisition from people unbiased in their attitude toward pet ownership. Usually, pet lovers are identified and studied when the decision to adopt an animal is already settled.”

Among participants who acquired pets, only 12-15% lived alone, meaning most shared households where they might not have been the primary caregiver. Additionally, some pets were reported as “not important” to participants, suggesting varying levels of emotional investment that more accurately reflect real-world pet ownership dynamics.

The research also found that losing a pet produced no significant changes in well-being measures—a finding that surprised researchers given extensive literature on pet bereavement. However, this may reflect the sample’s more casual relationship with their animals compared to devoted pet owners typically studied in grief research.

Context Matters for Human-Animal Bonds

The pandemic setting may have fundamentally altered how pets affected human well-being. Economic uncertainty, health concerns, and restricted mobility could have amplified the burdens of pet care while diminishing potential benefits.

“It appears that, at least during stressful periods, the average person, who may not be the primary caregiver but simply shares a household with the pet, is not significantly affected by the pet’s loss, nor is their well-being a strong predictor of the decision to acquire one,” Miklósi observed.

Kubinyi concluded that the research reveals important limitations in our understanding of human-animal relationships: “Based on the data, most people, living together with a companion animal, do not seem to experience any long-term ‘pet effect’, nor do they bond strongly with their animal.”

The findings suggest that claims about pets’ mental health benefits may apply primarily to highly devoted owners rather than the general population, highlighting the need for more nuanced approaches to pet ownership recommendations, especially during challenging times.