Exploring Associations Between Empathy, Anthropomorphizing, and Psychological Distress in Dog Parents

Abstract

Dog parents have a strong attachment to their pets and treat them as children. Similarly to the guilt experienced by the parents of human children, dog parents feel guilty when they have to travel or work long hours and leave their dogs at home alone. This study examined the empathic tendencies among dog parents and how they are related to dog parent guilt and other mental health symptoms. A sample of 332 dog owners from the United States, stratified by age and sex, was recruited for this study. The sample comprised 168 female and 164 male participants. The Guilt About Dog Parenting Scale (GAPS-D), Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale-21, Interpersonal Reactivity Index, and Dog Anthropomorphism Scale were administered via an online survey. Demographic variables, such as age, sex, race, education level, household income, relationship, and parental status, were also collected. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, correlation, and linear regression. As predicted, this study found that empathic tendencies in dog parents are related to guilt, anthropomorphizing, and mental health symptoms. This is the first study to examine empathetic tendencies among dog parents in relation to dog parent guilt. Researchers, educators, social workers, mental health professionals, and veterinarians should inform and educate pet owners about dog parent guilt. This will increase the knowledge of professionals, organizations, and pet owners suffering from such guilt. Cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) may offer a promising approach for helping pet parents identify, normalize, and better understand their thoughts, feelings, and behaviors related to empathic and anthropomorphic tendencies. By addressing these cognitive patterns, CBT could potentially help reduce associated feelings of guilt, depression, anxiety, and stress.

1. Introduction

Dog parent guilt is a recently identified phenomenon that is similar to guilt experienced by the parents of human children [1,2]. Dog parents have a strong attachment to their pets and treat them as children. The term dog parent is used to refer to dog owners who treat their dogs as if they were their children. Similarly to parents of human children, dog parents feel guilty in areas of emotional presence, physical energy, and competing demands [3,4]. They may feel guilty when they have to travel or work long hours and leave their dogs at home alone, or even when they do not give them enough attention by walking, petting, and playing with them. Kogan et al. [2] reported that 40% of dog owners avoid social gatherings to avoid leaving their pets at home alone.

Guilt is characterized by regret and depicted as a healthier self-conscious emotion than shame. Moreover, guilt has been associated with empathy [5,6,7] and empathetic concern for others by motivating individuals to apologize for their mistakes [8]. While guilt can have positive social benefits by encouraging people to make amends with others, excessive or improper levels of guilt can have negative repercussions that can cause psychological distress [9,10]. Guilt can lead to depression [5,6,7,11,12] and stress [13].

According to Gambin and Sharp [5], high levels of empathy can cause feelings of guilt and depression. They suggested that “sharing emotions with others may result in feelings of exaggerated responsibility for others’ suffering and maladaptive forms of guilt (e.g., generalized guilt) which, in turn, may elevate depressive symptoms” (p. 381). Tully et al. [7] reported that empathetic tendencies, combined with high levels of guilt, could cause depression. This study examines empathic tendencies in dog parents and how they may relate to dog parent guilt and mental health symptoms.

1.1. Empathy

The attachment of children and adults to pets plays a significant role in developing their ability to understand emotions and respond compassionately toward others; in other words, their ability to empathize [14]. Empathy is a multidimensional construct with emotional and cognitive components based on the ability to recognize and understand others’ feelings [15]. Cognitive empathy, sometimes referred to as perspective-taking empathy, is the ability to comprehend an affective situation, understand others’ emotions, and view their perspective; it is often described as the ability to put oneself in another person’s shoes. Emotional or affective empathy refers to the ability to experience and share emotional responses to others’ emotions [5,15]. “Affective empathy… can be linked to personal distress—a self-oriented aversive emotional reaction to another’s state or condition” [5] (p. 382). Empathetic concern, sometimes referred to as compassion or motivational empathy, encourages individuals to take action to help relieve another’s suffering [14]. Both affective and cognitive empathy build empathetic concern. Specifically, one feels an emotion, cognitively recognizes and understands it, and is then motivated to relieve or help with that suffering.

Empathy develops over time and is reinforced through life experiences. Children with a strong attachment to their pets have a higher level of empathy, which continues into adulthood [16,17]. Childhood involvement with pets promotes nurturance, love, and affection in human relationships and positive attitudes toward humans and pets in adulthood [14]. Empathy toward animals mirrors empathy toward other humans [14,18]. Young et al. [14] defined empathy as a “stimulated emotional state that relies on the ability to perceive, understand, and care about the experiences or perspectives of another person or animal” (p. 329).

Strong pet attachment increases empathy toward animals [14]; therefore, pet parents report that they can recognize, understand, and emotionally respond to their pets’ emotions [17]. Empathy is an internal motivator that can induce pet parents to feel the emotions of their pets, especially if there is a strong attachment. Pet parents perceive their pet’s behavior as similar to their own. Individuals with higher levels of empathy are more likely to be empathetic toward their pets. “The closer the behavior is linked to the experience of an animal, the more likely empathy will trigger a response” [14] (p. 329). For example, if a pet is panting in hot weather, it may trigger the pet’s parent to feel that the pet is thirsty and act by putting out a water bowl.

A new phenomenon called positive empathy has been examined to help understand empathetic concern for animals [14]. Young et al. [14] defined positive empathy as the motivation to help animals and share positive feelings, such as joy, with the animal. Positive empathy for animals can foster connections resulting in financial support, advocacy, emotional support, and direct or indirect involvement in helping animals. Strong attachments and close relationships increase positive empathy, and individuals exhibit empathetic or motivational empathy to take action that results in positive influence [14].

1.2. Empathy and Anthropomorphizing

Pet owners who identify as pet parents have a strong attachment to their pets and view them as family members. Studies have shown that when pets are perceived as family members or friends, they are anthropomorphized [14,19]. Anthropomorphism ascribes human characteristics, including emotions and cognition, to pets [19]. Anthropomorphism has been linked to pet owners who are empathetic [14,20]. Certain characteristics of pets can elicit the empathy of pet parents. Myers [20] discussed four animal characteristics that can elicit human empathy: agency, affectivity, coherence, and continuity. Agency refers to behaviors similar to those of humans in terms of movement, eating, and playing. Affectivity refers to an animal’s ability to express emotions, such as whining, crying, and shaking; these behaviors are similar to those of humans who are emotionally or physically hurt or anxious, thus causing pet parents to be triggered by these emotions and exhibit empathetic concern. Coherence refers to understanding the animal in terms of its body, legs, face, and especially eyes. Continuity refers to the time spent with an animal and has been shown to increase human–animal bonds [20]. Continuity can increase the dog owners’ feelings regarding understanding and empathizing with their pets.

Young et al. [14] reported that people tend to believe that animals experience a world similar to that of humans. Anthropomorphizing pets can cause owners to empathize with their pets and create more caring and loving tendencies linked to empathy. However, this can negatively affect the owners and their pets [14]. Young et al. [14] noted that humans may see a baby deer curled up and alone and assume that the mother has abandoned it; therefore, humans intervene and “rescue” the baby deer. Humans often fail to recognize that the mother may have left the baby deer intentionally and will return. This is an example of the projection of human experiences and emotions onto animals that causes harm to the animals.

1.3. Overview of Study

This study examined empathic tendencies in dog parents and how this may relate to guilt, anthropomorphizing, and mental health symptoms. To the author’s knowledge, this is the first study to examine empathic tendencies in dog parents and how they may relate to guilt. The empathy that pet owners exhibit toward their pets can be similar to their empathy toward other people [14,18]. Affective or personal distress and empathy have been shown to correlate with feelings of guilt and symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress [5,7]. It is predicted that those with personal distress, empathy, and higher anthropomorphizing scores are more susceptible to dog parent guilt, which may relate to symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress.

1.4. Hypotheses

Hypothesis 1.

The present study hypothesized that pet owners who report being attached to their pets during childhood report higher empathy.

Hypothesis 2.

Those with personal distress empathy report dog-parent guilt.

Hypothesis 3.

Those who engage in anthropomorphizing report dog-parent guilt.

Hypothesis 4.

Dog-parent guilt has a moderately positive correlation with depression, anxiety, and stress.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

A sample from the United States, stratified according to age and sex, was recruited through Prolific, an online marketplace that recruits participants and incentivizes the completion of surveys by providing monetary compensation. PsychData hosted the survey and provided a link for participants to click after consenting to participate. Participants had to be 18 years or older, physically present in the United States, and the primary caretaker of a dog for at least six months. This study was approved in June 2024 by East Tennessee State University’s Institutional Review Board prior to data collection (IRB #c0624.5e). The data was collected in July 2024.

2.2. Instruments

A demographic questionnaire was used to assess demographic variables such as age, sex, race, education level, household income, relationship, and parental status. The participants were stratified according to age and sex. Race was coincidentally stratified by participants as White/Caucasian or Black/African American.

2.3. Guilt About Dog Parenting Scale (GAPS-D)

The GAPS-D [2] was used to assess the sense of guilt related to dog parenting. It was modeled after the Guilt on Parenting Scale developed by Haslam et al. [3] Kogan et al. [2] used the same questions but changed the word “child” to the word “dog.” The scale comprised 10 items rated on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (definitely do not agree) to 7 (definitely agree), with total scores ranging from 10 to 70. Cronbach’s alpha for the GAPS-D was 0.89. Higher scores indicate a greater sense of guilt related to dog “parenting”.

2.4. Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21)

The DASS-21 [21] is a 21-item measure that is widely used to assess negative emotionality in the preceding week. This scale comprises three subscales: a depression subscale (DASS-D), which measures hopelessness, low self-esteem, and low positive affect; an anxiety subscale (DASS-A), which assesses autonomic arousal, musculoskeletal symptoms, situational anxiety, and subjective experiences of anxious arousal; and a stress subscale (DASS-S), which assesses tension, agitation, and negative affect. All three subscales comprise seven items rated on a 4-point scale from 0 (Did not apply to me at all) to 3 (Applied to me very much or most of the time), with total scores ranging from 0 to 63. The internal consistency was 0.72, 0.77, and 0.70 for the depression, anxiety, and stress subscales, respectively [22]. The overall score, which includes all items, had a high consistency alpha of 0.88 [22].

2.5. Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI)

The IRI [23] is a 28-item self-report scale used to measure empathy. This scale comprises four subscales: perspective taking (PT), which is the ability to adopt other people’s point of view; fantasy (F), which is the tendency to identify and take on the feelings and actions of fictional characters from books and movies; empathic concern (EC), which assesses “other-oriented” feelings of compassion and concern for unfortunate others; and personal distress (PD), which assesses “self-oriented” feelings of personal anxiety and discomfort when witnessing the negative experiences of others. Each item is scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (does not describe me at all) to 5 (describes me very well). The scale showed adequate internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha value was 0.79 for the total score and between 0.66 and 0.76 for the subdimensions).

2.6. Dog Anthropomorphism (DA)

The DA scale [19] comprises seven statements rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely). The statements inquire regarding the extent to which the respondents believe that the average dog has the following characteristics: a mind of its own (thinks for itself), intentions (does things on purpose), free will (makes its own choices), consciousness (knows what it is), desires (strongly wishes or wants), beliefs (has opinions about something), and the ability to experience emotions (feels happy or sad). After field testing this instrument, this researcher added the definitions in parentheses to aid in understanding. The measure was found to be reliable, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.85.

2.7. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analyses, including descriptive statistics, correlations, and linear regressions, were conducted using IBM SPSS Version 29 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) to summarize the data and examine the findings of the research hypotheses. Several preliminary steps were completed before the statistical analyses. The researcher carefully reviewed all the responses obtained to check for missing data, coding errors, and unusually missing values. Several questions on the questionnaires required recoding as instructed by the instrument authors. The researcher carefully recoded the questions and ran the frequencies to ensure that all changes were completed correctly. All data were reviewed before statistical analyses were performed. Fortunately, missing data was low and did not require imputation or data removal. A post hoc sensitivity power analysis was also conducted for Pearson correlations with the study sample (N = 332, two-tailed, α = 0.05). The analysis indicated that the study had 80% power to detect correlations as small as r = 0.15 and 90% power to detect correlations as small as r = 0.18, suggesting that the study was adequately powered to detect effects in the small-to-moderate range.

3. Results

The survey was field tested for usability and the overall user experience. When the sample participants completed the survey, the researcher exported the data to the SPSS software (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) to check for missing data or inconsistencies. After the field-testing session, the researcher began the actual study.

SPSS version 29 was used for the data analysis. A total of 332 participants completed the survey, comprising a representative sample of participants from the United States Plstratified by sex and age. Race was stratified as White/Caucasian and Black/African American by the participants. The sample comprised 168 (50.6%) female and 164 (49.4%) male participants. Regarding age, 66 (19.9%) participants were under 30 years old, 68 (20.5%) were 30–39 years old, 68 (20.5%) were 40–49 years old, 66 (19.9%) were 50–59 years old, and 64 (19.3%) were 60 years or older. Regarding race, 149 (44.9%) reported being White/Caucasian, 141 (42.5%) reported being Black/African American, 18 (5.4%) reported being Asian, 7 (2.1%) reported being Biracial/Multiracial, 5 (1.5%) reported being Native American/Indigenous, and 11 (3.3%) reported being other races; no participant reported being Middle Eastern or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander. Other demographic characteristics are listed in

Table 1. Participant demographics.

Variable	Answer	N	(%)
Sex	Female	168	50.6
	Male	164	49.4
Age (years)	Under 30	66	19.9
	30–39	68	20.5
	40–49	68	20.5
	50–59	66	19.9
	60 and older	64	19.3
Race	White/Caucasian	149	44.9
	African American/Black	141	42.5
	Asian	18	5.4
	Biracial/multiracial	7	2.1
	Native American/Indigenous	5	1.5
	Other	11	3.3
Education level	Less than high school	1	0.3
	High school or GED	94	28.3
	Vocational/trade school/2-year college	66	19.9
	College 4-year degree	127	38.3
	Graduate school/professional degree	44	13.3
Household income	Less than 25,000	38	11.4
	(25,000–49,999)	66	19.9
	(50,000–99,999)	134	40.4
	Greater than 100,000	87	26.2
	Prefer not to say	7	2.1
Relationship status	Single	92	27.7
	Married	133	40.1
	Divorced	20	6.0
	Separated	6	1.8
	Widowed	8	2.4
	Committed relationship	72	21.7
Children	Yes	163	49.1
	No	169	50.9
Children under the age 18		145	43.7
Owned a Pet During Childhood	Yes	257	77.4
	No	75	22.6
Attachment to Childhood Pet	Unattached	10	3
	Somewhat	45	13.6
	Very	79	23.8
	Extremely	125	37.7

Note. Totals for some categories (e.g., relationship status, race) do not sum to 332 due to missing responses.

.

Participants were asked to complete a demographic questionnaire regarding whether they owned a pet during their childhood, as well as their attachment level to that pet. A total of 257 (77.4%) participants reported having owned pets, and 75 (22.6%) reported not having owned pets. Among the ones who had pets during childhood, 10 (3%) reported being unattached, 45 (13.6%) reported being somewhat attached, 79 (23.8%) reported being very attached, and 125 (37.7%) reported being extremely attached. Empathy was measured using the IRI scale. A correlational analysis failed to reveal a relationship between the IRI and owning or being attached to a pet during childhood. Therefore, those who owned pets and reported being attached to them did not show any differences in their empathy tendencies.

Dog parent guilt was measured using GAPS-D, and personal distress empathy was measured using the IRI-PD scale. A total of 331 participants (one participant failed to answer) obtained a mean score of 44.44 and a standard deviation (SD) of 11.31 on GAPS-D.

Table 2. Dog parent guilt and empathy.

GAPS-D and IRI Subscale Scores	N	Mean	Standard Deviation
GAPS-D	331	44.44	11.31
IRI-PD	332	18.92	5.51
IRI-PT	332	21.16	4.39
IRI-EC	332	27.64	4.83
F	332	22.63	5.25

Note. GAPS-D = Guilt About Parenting Dog Scale; IRI = Interpersonal Reactivity Index; PD = Personal Distress; PT = Perspective Taking; EC = Empathic Concern; F = Fantasy.

lists the mean and SD scores for each IRI subscale.

A correlational analysis failed to reveal a relationship between other demographic variables with dog parent guilt or empathy; the variables tested were sex, age, race, relationship status, household income, education status, and parental status. These analyses were conducted for exploratory purposes and were not part of the original a priori hypotheses; therefore, the results should be interpreted with caution due to the increased risk of Type I error from multiple comparisons. Further, it revealed a significant relationship between IRI-PD and GAPS-D (r = 0.368, p < 0.001). There was no correlation between GAPS-D and the remaining empathy subscale scores on the IRI.

Bivariate regression analysis showed a significant relationship between the GAPS-D and IRI-PD. The R-squared value was 0.136, implying that 13.6% of the variance in the GAPS-D scores is explained by IRI-PD. For every one-unit increase in the IRI-PD on average, the GAPS-D scores increased by 0.105 (t = 7.18, p < 0.001). This indicates that those who exhibit personal distress empathy are more likely to experience dog parent guilt.

Dog parent guilt was measured using the GAPS-D, and anthropomorphizing was measured using the DA scale. Among the 331 participants, the mean GAPS-D was 44.44, and the SD was 11.31; the mean score on the DA scale was 25.96 with an SD of 5.83 (

Table 3. Dog parent guilt and anthropomorphizing.

GAPS-D and DA Scores	N	Mean	Standard Deviation
GAPS-D	331	44.44	11.31
DA	331	25.96	5.82

Note. GAPS-D = Guilt About Parenting Dog Scale; DA = Dog Anthropomorphism.

).

A correlational analysis failed to reveal a relationship between other demographic variables and anthropomorphizing; the variables tested were sex, age, race, relationship status, household income, education status, and parental status. These analyses were conducted for exploratory purposes and were not part of the original a priori hypotheses; therefore, the results should be interpreted with caution due to the increased risk of Type I error from multiple comparisons. It also revealed a significant relationship between the GAPS-D and DA scale (r = 0.311, p < 0.001).

Bivariate regression analysis revealed a significant relationship between the GAPS-D and DA scales. The R-squared value was 0.097, indicating that 9.7% of the variance in the GAPS-D scores was explained by DA. For every average one-unit increase in the DA scale, the GAPS-D scores increased by 0.102 (t = 5.93, p < 0.001). This indicates that those who anthropomorphize their pets experience dog parent guilt.

The correlational analysis found moderate positive relationships between those who reported dog parent guilt and DASS-D (r = 0.353, p < 0.01), DASS-A (r = 0.363, p < 0.01), DASS-S (r = 0.417, p < 0.01), and IRI-PT (r = 0.368, p < 0.01). As predicted, dog parenting guilt had moderately positive correlations with depression, anxiety, and stress (see

Table 4. Correlations for dog parent guilt and DASS scale.

	GAPS-D	DASS-D	DASS-A	DASS-S
GAPS-D	---	---	---	---
DASS-D	0.353 **	---	---	---
DASS-A	0.363 **	0.694 **	---	---
DASS-S	0.417 **	0.766 **	0.765 **	---

Note. ** p < 0.01; GAPS-D = Guilt About Parenting Dog Scale; DASS = Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale; D = Depression; A = Anxiety; S = Stress.

and

Table 5. Descriptive statistics.

	N	M	SD
GAPS-D	748	3.76	4.69
DASS-D	748	2.52	3.55
DASS-A	748	1.30	3.66
DASS-S	748	9.22	10.31

Note. GAPS-D = Guilt About Parenting Dog Scale; DASS = Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale; D = Depression; A = Anxiety; S = Stress.

for correlations and descriptive statistics, respectively). This analysis found no other demographic relationships with the DASS; the variables tested were sex, age, race, relationship status, household income, educational status, and parental status.

4. Discussion

This study showed that empathic tendencies in dog parents correlate with guilt, anthropomorphism, and mental health symptoms. This is the first study to examine the empathetic tendencies among dog parents concerning dog parent guilt. Several studies have shown that empathetic tendencies in the parents of human children lead to parental guilt, which, in turn, leads to depression [5,7]. These empathetic tendencies toward parents of human children are similar to those toward pets [14,18].

Children with a strong attachment to their pets have higher levels of empathy that continue into adulthood [16,17]. Childhood involvement with pets promotes nurturance, love, and affection in human relationships and positive attitudes toward humans and pets in adulthood [14]. Testing Hypothesis 1, a correlational analysis did not yield statistically significant evidence of a relationship between the IRI scores and owning or being attached to a pet during childhood. Remarkably, those who owned pets and reported attachment did not show any differences in their empathetic tendencies.

As predicted in Hypothesis 2, this study found that those who had personal distress empathy were more likely to experience dog parent guilt. Affective empathy, also known as personal distress empathy, is an internal motivator that allows pet parents to experience their pet’s emotions. Strong pet attachments increase empathy [14], and dog parents have a strong attachment to their pets and treat them as children. Dog parents, similar to the parents of human children, feel guilty when they have to travel, work long hours, or cannot give their pets the necessary attention. Dog parents feel guilty about leaving their dogs at home alone; therefore, they avoid social events, vacations, or any recreational activities that their pets cannot attend.

Consistent with expectations and previous research [19], Hypothesis 3 found that those who anthropomorphized their pets experienced dog parent guilt. Studies have shown that when pets are perceived as family members or friends, they are ascribed human characteristics, including emotions and cognition [19].

Regarding Hypothesis 4, another finding of this study, similar to other studies, is that dog parent guilt has moderately positive correlations with depression, anxiety, and stress [6,12,13]. Guilt is a healthy, self-conscious emotion that helps individuals make moral decisions. It has positive social benefits, encouraging people to make amends with others and apologize when they feel that they have made a mistake; however, excessive or improper levels of guilt can have negative consequences and cause psychological distress [9,10] such as depression [5,6,7,10,12,13], anxiety [6,11,12,13,24], and stress [13].

This study had several limitations. The use of self-report questionnaires has weak validity because it is difficult for participants to answer questions using a Likert scale with responses such as strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree. Moreover, some of the questions may lead participants to answer in a manner that seems more appropriate or “favorable” to societal standards. Despite using a representative sample for this study, with only 332 participants, it is recommended to use a larger representative sample. Surprisingly, sex and age were not found to have statistically significant effects on empathy, dog parent guilt, or anthropomorphism. Pet guilt is a new phenomenon that must be explored so that pet-parent guilt can be acknowledged and understood when working with pet parents who suffer from pet-parent guilt.

Implications

This study showed that dog parent guilt was found among those with affective empathetic tendencies. Dog parents have strong pet attachments and feel and respond to their pets’ emotions [1,15,19]. Empathetic dog parents tend to anthropomorphize their pets by projecting their feelings and experiences onto them. Empathy and anthropomorphism correlate with dog parent guilt, which correlates with symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress.

A multisystem approach involving health professionals for humans and animals, researchers, educators, and organizations is necessary to raise awareness about pet-parent guilt [1,6]. It would be helpful for clinicians to understand the role of pets in the lives of clients to serve them better. Pet parents may not understand the guilt they experience. They may not even realize that their symptoms could stem from pet-parent guilt. Researchers, educators, social workers, mental health professionals, and veterinarians should inform and educate people about dog parent guilt [1]. This will increase the knowledge of not only professionals and organizations but also pet owners who unknowingly suffer from dog parent guilt. Kogen et al. [2] reported pet-owner guilt as disenfranchised guilt or guilt that is unrecognized, unacknowledged, or unsupported.

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) may represent a promising approach for helping pet parents better understand and manage the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors associated with empathic and anthropomorphic tendencies. Because many pet parents describe their pets as “children,” parallels can be drawn to the use of CBT with human parents, where it has been shown to reduce guilt, self-blame, and maladaptive cognitions related to parenting [25]. By targeting these cognitive patterns, CBT has the potential to reduce associated feelings of guilt, depression, anxiety, and stress. Through psychoeducation and cognitive restructuring, individuals can learn to evaluate their thoughts more logically, reframe negative or unrealistic appraisals, and replace them with healthier, more balanced perspectives [25]. Numerous studies demonstrate that CBT is effective in alleviating guilt, depression, and anxiety in diverse populations [26,27], suggesting it may be a worthwhile avenue for exploration in the pet-parent context. However, it is important to emphasize that no therapeutic approaches have been studied specifically for dog parent guilt, and further research is needed to evaluate the relevance and effectiveness of CBT in this unique population.