宠物能融入人类的自我吗? 宠物相关信息的记忆加工优势探索

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2025.1378

心理学报 ›› 2025, Vol. 57 ›› Issue (8): 1378-1390.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2025.1378 cstr: 32110.14.2025.1378

宠物能融入人类的自我吗? 宠物相关信息的记忆加工优势探索

徐科朋¹^,²^,³, 陈佳莉¹, 薛宏¹^,², 欧倩倩⁴, 韩振华¹, 张积家¹^,²^,³, 许燕⁵, 张姝玥¹^,²^,³()

1.广西师范大学教育学部心理学系
2.广西高校认知神经与应用心理重点实验室
3.广西师范大学共生教育研究中心, 广西桂林, 541004
4.深圳大学心理学院, 深圳 518060
5.北京师范大学心理学部;应用实验心理北京市重点实验室;心理学国家级实验教学示范中心〔北京师范大学〕, 北京 100875

收稿日期:2024-06-18 发布日期:2025-05-22 出版日期:2025-08-25
通讯作者: 张姝玥, E-mail:shuyuezh@126.com
基金资助:
教育部人文社会科学一般项目(24YJAZH185);广西教育科学规划课题委托重点课题(2024AA22);广西哲学社会科学规划课题一般项目(23ZLB009)

Will you make pets an integral part of your self? An exploration of the memory processing advantage of pet-related information

XU Kepeng¹^,²^,³, CHEN Jiali¹, XUE Hong¹^,², OU Qianqian⁴, HAN Zhenhua¹, ZHANG Jijia¹^,²^,³, XU Yan⁵, ZHANG Shuyue¹^,²^,³()

1. Department of psychology, Faculty of Education, Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, China
2. Guangxi College and University Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Applied Psychology, Guilin 541004, China
3. Symbiosis Education Research Center, Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, China
4. School of Psychology, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China
5. Faculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University;Beijing Key Laboratory of Applied Experimental Psychology;National Demonstration Center for Experimental Psychology Education (Beijing Normal University), Beijing 100875, China

Received:2024-06-18 Online:2025-05-22 Published:2025-08-25

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

越来越多的宠物进入人类生活, 人们与之建立稳定的人宠关系。为揭示良好人宠关系的内在基础, 本文通过3个研究探查宠物自我及宠物相关信息的记忆加工优势。研究1采用问卷法初步探讨当今社会人宠关系, 结果发现相比非养宠人,养宠人会将宠物融入自我, 初步证实宠物自我的存在。研究2采用经典R/K范式探讨养宠人对宠物相关信息的加工特征, 结果发现养宠人对与宠物相关的信息有更强的记忆加工优势,在宠物参照下的再认率显著高于名人参照和语义参照, 并且与自我参照和母亲参照下的再认率相近。研究3进一步采用ERP技术考察养宠人对宠物相关信息加工的电生理特征, 结果发现宠物参照下诱发的LPC波幅显著高于名人参照,显著低于自我参照, 但与母亲参照类似。整个研究揭示了在稳定的人宠关系中, 养宠人存在一种特殊的宠物自我, 并表现出记忆参照效应, 但宠物自我距离个体的自我核心还存在一定距离。

关键词: 养宠人, 宠物自我, 宠物参照效应

Abstract:

A good human-pet relationship can offer many benefits to humans, yet the internal mechanisms of this significant, intimate bond remain unclear. Due to prolonged close contact, pet owners may regard their pets as part of their family and even incorporate pets into their self-concept, demonstrating an advantage in processing pet-related information.

Based on this, this work comprised three studies, which systematically investigated the relationship between pet owners and their pets. In study 1, the Inclusion of Other in the Self (IOS) Scale and a self-concept questionnaire examined the relationship between the self-concept of pets and their owners. In Study 2, the R/K paradigm explored the processing characteristics of pet-related information by pet owners, with a focus on memory processing, and verified the presence of the pet reference effect. Finally, Study 3 utilized ERP technology to investigate the pet reference processing bias among pet owners from an electrophysiological perspective.

The results indicated that: (1) Compared with non-owners, pet owners typically incorporate their pets into their self-concept to create a pet self. (2) Pet owners exhibit a stronger memory processing advantage for pet-related information and a significantly higher recognition rate for pet references in comparison to those for celebrities and semantic references. This recognition rate is similar to that for self-references and mother references. (3) The induced LPC amplitude for pet references was significantly higher than that for celebrity references, yet similar to that of mother references and significantly lower than self-references.

To conclude, this study has demonstrated that pet owners tend to regard their pets as an extension of themselves, creating a pet self, and exhibit a pet reference effect on memory. However, the pet self essentially remains a relational self, maintaining a certain distance from the core self. Existing research on the self has emphasized significant others while excluding the realm of pets. More importantly, it is necessary to consider the impact of pets on individuals. Pet owners often regard their pets as cherished family members, fostering a strong bond that enables individuals to perceive their pets as an extension of themselves; this contributes to the positive effect of pets on individuals’ physical and mental well-being.

Key words: pet owner, pet self, PRE

中图分类号:

B849: C91

徐科朋, 陈佳莉, 薛宏, 欧倩倩, 韩振华, 张积家, 许燕, 张姝玥. (2025). 宠物能融入人类的自我吗? 宠物相关信息的记忆加工优势探索. 心理学报, 57(8), 1378-1390.

XU Kepeng, CHEN Jiali, XUE Hong, OU Qianqian, HAN Zhenhua, ZHANG Jijia, XU Yan, ZHANG Shuyue. (2025). Will you make pets an integral part of your self? An exploration of the memory processing advantage of pet-related information. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 57(8), 1378-1390.

图/表 7

参考文献 62

[1]	Allan B., Guzman D. S., Cucueco I. B. V., Cuenco N. G. C., Cunanan R. T., & Edgar J. E. (2009). Petmanship: Understanding elderly filipinos' self-perceived health and self esteem captured from their lived experiences with pet companions. Educational Gerontology, 35(11), 963-989.
[2]	Allen R., McConnell E., Paige L., & Brandon T. H. (2019). We are family: Viewing pets as family members improves wellbeing. Anthrozoös, 32(4), 459-470.
[3]	Amiot C. E., & Bastian B. (2015). Toward a psychology of human-animal relations. Psychological Bulletin, 141(1), 6-47. doi: 10.1037/a0038147 pmid: 25365760
[4]	American Pet Products Association. (2020). APPA 2020-2021 National Pet Owners Survey. Retrieved from
[5]	Applebaum J. W., Shieu M. M., McDonald S. E., Dunietz G. L., & Braley T. J. (2023). The impact of sustained ownership of a pet on cognitive health: A population-based study. Journal of Aging and Health, 35(3-4), 230-241.
[6]	Aron A., Aron E. N., Tudor M., & Nelson G. (1991). Close relationships as including other in the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(2), 241-253.
[7]	Aron A., McLaughlin-Volpe T., Mashek D., Lewandowski G., Wright S. C., & Aron E. N. (2004). Including others in the self. European Review of Social Psychology, 15(1), 101-132.
[8]	Auger B., & Amiot C. E. (2019). Testing the roles of intergroup anxiety and inclusion of animals in the self as mechanisms that underpin the “pets as ambassadors” effect. Anthrozoös, 32(1), 5-21.
[9]	Bailey K. G. (1988). Psychological kinship: Implications for the helping professions. Psychotherapy Theory Research Practice Training, 25(1), 132-141.
[10]	Barker S. B., Barker R. T., Dawson K. S., & Knisely J. S. (1997). The use of the family life space diagram in establishing interconnectedness: A preliminary study of sexual abuse survivors, their significant others, and pets. Individual Psychology, 53(4), 435-450.
[11]	Berryman J. C., Howells K., & Lloyd-Evans M. (1985). Pet owner attitudes to pets and people: A psychological study. Veterinary Record, 117(25-26), 659-661. doi: 10.1136/vr.117.25-26.659 pmid: 4095881
[12]	Bi C., Oyserman D., Lin Y., Zhang J., Chu B., & Yang H. (2020). Left behind, not alone: Feeling, function and neurophysiological markers of self-expansion among left- behind children and not left-behind peers. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 15(4), 467-478.
[13]	Brown C. M., Hengy S. M., & McConnell A. R. (2016). Thinking about cats or dogs provides relief from social rejection. Anthrozoös, 29(1), 47-58.
[14]	Carpenter C. J., & Spottswood E. L. (2013). Exploring romantic relationships on social networking sites using the self-expansion model. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1531-1537.
[15]	Chen J., Yuan J., Feng T., Chen A., Gu B., & Li H. (2011). Temporal features of the degree effect in self-relevance: Neural correlates. Biological Psychology, 87(2), 290-295. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2011.03.012 pmid: 21470572
[16]	Compitus K. (2019). Traumatic pet loss and the integration of attachment-based animal assisted therapy. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 29(2), 119-131.
[17]	Cunningham S. J., & Turk D. J. (2017). Editorial: A review of self-processing biases in cognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(6), 987-995.
[18]	Czerwinski V. H., Smith B. P., Hynd P. I., & Hazel S. J. (2016). The influence of maternal care on stress-related behaviors in domestic dogs: What can we learn from the rodent literature? Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 14(1), 52-59.
[19]	Ellingsen K., Zanella A. J., Bjerkas E., & Indrebo A. (2010). The relationship between empathy, perception of pain and attitudes toward pets among Norwegian dog owners. Anthrozoös, 23(3), 231-243.
[20]	Fields E. C., & Kuperberg G. R. (2016). Dynamic effects of self-relevance and task on the neural processing of emotional words in context. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1-12.
[21]	Folstein J. R., & Van Petten C. (2008). Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: A review. Psychophysiology, 45(1), 152-170. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00602.x pmid: 17850238
[22]	Gray H., Ambady N., Lowenthal W., & Deldin P. (2004). P300 as an index of attention to self-relevant stimuli. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(2), 216-224.
[23]	Guan Y. H., & Chi Y. K. (2006). The effect of self-reference and friend-reference on personality traits memory. Journal of Psychological Science, 29(2), 448-450.
	[管延华, 迟毓凯. (2006). 自我参照与朋友参照对人格特质记忆的影响. 心理科学, 29(2), 448-450.]
[24]	Hahn A., & Goedderz A. (2020). Trait-unconsciousness, state- unconsciousness, preconsciousness, and social miscalibration in the context of implicit evaluation. Social Cognition, 38(Suppl.), S115-S134.
[25]	Hatteberg S. J. (2021). A tale of many Sources: The perceived benefits of significant other, similar other, and significant and similar other social support. Sociological Perspectives, 64(1), 37-57.
[26]	Julal F. S., Carnelley K. B., & Rowe A. (2017). The relationship between attachment style and placement of parents in adults’ attachment networks over time. Attachment and Human Development, 19(4), 328-406.
[27]	Kanat-Maymon Y., Wolfson S., Cohen R., & Roth G. (2021). The benefits of giving as well as receiving need support in human-pet relations. Journal of Happiness Studies, 22(2), 1441-1457.
[28]	Klein S. B. (2012). A role for self-referential processing in tasks requiring participants to imagine survival on the savannah. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(5), 1234-1242.
[29]	Kotlewska I., & Nowicka A. (2016). Present-self, past-self and the close-other: Neural correlates of assigning trait adjectives to oneself and others. European Journal of Neuroscience, 44(4), 2064-2071. doi: 10.1111/ejn.13293 pmid: 27285486
[30]	Kubinyi E., Turcsán B., & Miklósi Á. (2009). Dog and owner demographic characteristics and dog personality trait associations. Behave Process, 81(3), 392-401.
[31]	Li S. F., Xu K. P., Xu Q. Y., Xia R. X., Ren D. Y., & Zhou A. B. (2016). Positive bias in self-appraisals from friend’s perspective: An event-related potential study. Clinical Neuroscience, 27(9), 694-698.
[32]	Liu-Pham R., Patterson L., & Keefer L. A. (2022). You get what you give: Pet relationships in a communal orientation framework. Personality and Individual Differences, 92(1), 69-73.
[33]	McConnell A. R., Lloyd M. E., & Humphrey N. (2019). We are family: Viewing pets as family members improves well-being. Anthrozoös, 32(4), 459-470.
[34]	McDonough I. M., Erwin H. B., Sin N. L., & Allen R. S. (2022). Pet ownership is associated with greater cognitive and brain health in a cross-sectional sample across the adult lifespan. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 14, 953889.
[35]	Meehan M., Massavelli B., & Pachana N. (2017). Using attachment theory and social support theory to examine and measure pets as sources of social Support and attachment figures. Anthrozoös, 30(2), 273-289.
[36]	Mollica F., & Piantadosi S. T. (2022). Logical word learning: The case of kinship. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 29(3), 766-799.
[37]	Nieuwenhuis S., Aston-Jones G., & Cohen J. D. (2005). Decision making, the P3, and the locus coeruleus- norepinephrine system. Psychological Bulletin, 131(4), 510-532. pmid: 16060800
[38]	Paolini S., Wright S. C., Dys-Steenbergen O., & Favara I. (2016). Self-Expansion and intergroup contact: Expectancies and motives to self-expand lead to greater interest in outgroup contact and more positive intergroup relations. Journal of Social Issues, 72(3), 450-471.
[39]	Pet Food Manufacturers Association. (2021). PFMA Annual Report 2021. Retrieved from https://ukpetfood-reports.co.uk/annual-report-2021/
[40]	Qi J. L., & Zhu Y. (2002). The self-reference effect of Chinese college students. Journal of Psychological Science, 25(3), 275-278.
	[戚健俐, 朱滢. (2002). 中国大学生的记忆的自我参照效应. 心理科学, 25(3), 275-278.]
[41]	Rubianes M., Muñoz F., Casado P., Hernández-Gutiérrez D., Jiménez-Ortega L., Fondevila S.,... Martín-Loeches M. (2020). Am I the same person across my life span? An event-related brain potentials study of the temporal perspective in self-identity. Psychophysiology, 58(1), e13692.
[42]	Sui J., & Gu X. (2017). Self as object: Emerging trends in self research. Trends in Neurosciences, 40(11), 643-653. doi: S0166-2236(17)30177-7 pmid: 28988827
[43]	Symons C. S., & Johnson B. T. (1997). The self-reference effect in memory: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 121(3), 371-394. pmid: 9136641
[44]	Tanguay A., Benton L., Romio L., Sievers C., Davidson P., & Renoult L. (2018). The ERP correlates of self-knowledge: Are assessments of one's past, present, and future traits closer to semantic or episodic memory? Neuropsychologia, 110, 65-83. doi: S0028-3932(17)30399-8 pmid: 29107000
[45]	Tipper B. (2011). “A dog who I know quite well”: Everyday relationships between children and animals. Children's Geographies, 9(2), 145-165.
[46]	Topolski R., Weaver N., Martin Z., & McCoy J. (2013). Choosing between the emotional dog and the rational pal: A moral dilemma with a tail. Anthrozoös, 26(2), 253-263.
[47]	Tuan Y. F. (1984). Dominance and affection: The making of pets. Yale University.
[48]	Van den Bos, M., Cunningham S. J., Conway M. A., & Turk D. J. (2010). Mine to remember: the impact of ownership on recollective experience. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(6), 1065-1071.
[49]	Wang B., Fu Y., & Zhang J. J. (2019). Influence of language and culture on retrieval-induced forgetting under the self-referential condition: Evidence from the Han and the Mosuo. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 51(4), 450-461. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00450
	[王斌, 付雅, 张积家. (2019). 语言和文化对自我参照条件下提取诱发遗忘的影响——来自汉族人和摩梭人的证据. 心理学报, 51(4), 450-461.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00450
[50]	Wang X. X., Jiang S., & Zhang J. J. (2018). Effect of the spatial linguistic symbol on the container metaphor of seniority rules. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 50(9), 953-964. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2018.00953
	[汪新筱, 江珊, 张积家. (2018). 空间语言标记影响亲属关系的容器隐喻. 心理学报, 50(9), 953-964.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2018.00953
[51]	Wu H. F., Wang Y. F., Hu X. Y., Zhang H., Chen Y., Guo D. M., & Zhang Y. (2021). Whether the mother was alive or not could influence Chinese mother's reference effect. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 29(4), 665-670.
	[吴慧芬, 王玉花, 胡晓毅, 张辉, 陈艳, 郭冬梅, 张妍. (2021). 母亲是否健在对中国人母亲参照效应的影响. 中国临床心理学杂志, 29(4), 665-670.]
[52]	Wu H. F., & Zhou A. B. (2013). The experimental studies of friend-referent effect in Chinese Young College Students. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 11(3), 380-386.
	[吴慧芬, 周爱保. (2013). 中国青年大学生朋友参照效应的实证研究. 心理与行为研究, 11(3), 380-386.]
[53]	Xu K. P., Ou Q. Q., Luo D. L., Shi X. T., Li K., Huang Y. H.,... He Q. H. (2022). Moral decision-making in pettism: The influence of animal type, pet ownership status and social distance. PsyCh Journal, 12(1), 54-72.
[54]	Xu K. P., Ou Q. Q., Xue H., Luo D. L., Zhang S. Y., & Xu Y. (2023). Traditional pettism: The influence of pet ownership status, pet type, and pet properties on pet moral standing. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 55(10), 1662-1676. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2023.01662
	[徐科朋, 欧倩倩, 薛宏, 罗冬丽, 张姝玥, 许燕. (2023). 传统宠物主义: 养宠人身份、宠物类型与宠物特质对宠物道德地位的影响. 心理学报, 55(10), 1662-1676.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2023.01662
[55]	Yang Q., Feng Y. R., & Zhang J. J. (2019). The language and cultural differences of father-reference processing: Based on the retrieval-induced forgetting. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 51(3), 304-315. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00304
	[杨群, 冯意然, 张积家. (2019). 父亲参照效应的语言与文化差异: 来自提取诱发遗忘的证据. 心理学报, 51(3), 304-315.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00304
[56]	Yuan W. Y., Zhang X. X., Du J., Li H., & Yang J. (2018). The effect of thoughts of death and thoughts of survival on self-referential processing: Evidence from ERPS. Journal of Psychological Science, 41(1), 38-44.
	[袁文颖, 张馨心, 杜杰, 李豪, 杨娟. (2018). 生存和死亡启动对自我参照加工的影响: ERP证据. 心理科学, 41(1), 38-44.]
[57]	Zhang P. C., Li Y. Z., Zhou S. J., Gao X. P., & Pan X. (2019). Enhancement effect of near spatial distance on self-referential processing: Evidence from behavioral and ERPs studies. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 51(8), 879-889. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00879
	[章鹏程, 李杨卓, 周淑金, 高湘萍, 潘鑫. (2019). 自我参照加工的近空间距离增强效应: 来自行为与ERPs的证据. 心理学报, 51(8), 879-889.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00879
[58]	Zhang Y. Y., Fan H. X., & Pan M. (2019). The “Differential mode of association” of family intimate relationships and its effect on anxiety and depression of pregnant women. Psychological Exploration, 39(1), 90-96.
	[张亚亚, 范红霞, 潘敏. (2019). 孕妇家庭亲密关系的差序格局及其对焦虑、抑郁情绪的影响. 心理学探新, 39(1), 90-96.]
[59]	Zhong Y. P., Wang X. A., Fan W., Qi G. W., & Du F. (2014). Self-reference effect in occupation selection conditions: Evidences from behavior and ERPs. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 22(2), 218-222.
	[钟毅平, 王锡爱, 范伟, 戚光威, 杜芬. (2014). 职业选择情境中的自我参照效应: 行为和ERPs的证据. 中国临床心理学杂志, 22(2), 218-222.]
[60]	Zhou L., & Su Y. J. (2008). The role of genuine intimacy in the lover-reference effect. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 40(4), 487-495.
	[周丽, 苏彦捷. (2008). 实际亲密度对恋人参照效应的影响. 心理学报, 40(4), 487-495.]
[61]	Zhu Y., & Zhang L. (2001). An experimental study on the self-reference effect. Science in China (series C), (6), 537-543.
	[朱滢, 张力. (2001). 自我记忆效应的实验研究. 中国科学(C辑:生命科学), (6), 537-543.]
[62]	Zilcha-Mano S., Mikulincer M., & Shaver P. R. (2011). An attachment perspective on human-pet relationships: Conceptualization and assessment of pet attachment orientations. Journal of Research in Personality, 45(4), 345-357.

被试类型	非养宠人		养宠人
被试类型	总再认率	R再认率	总再认率	R再认率
自我	0.73(0.02)	0.46(0.04)	0.66(0.03)	0.45(0.04)
母亲	0.69(0.02)	0.46(0.04)	0.65(0.02)	0.42(0.03)
宠物	0.62(0.02)	0.37(0.03)	0.67(0.03)	0.42(0.04)
语义	0.60(0.03)	0.37(0.04)	0.58(0.03)	0.34(0.04)
名人	0.65(0.03)	0.35(0.04)	0.57(0.04)	0.31(0.04)

被试类型	非养宠人		养宠人
被试类型	总再认率	R再认率	总再认率	R再认率
自我	0.73(0.02)	0.46(0.04)	0.66(0.03)	0.45(0.04)
母亲	0.69(0.02)	0.46(0.04)	0.65(0.02)	0.42(0.03)
宠物	0.62(0.02)	0.37(0.03)	0.67(0.03)	0.42(0.04)
语义	0.60(0.03)	0.37(0.04)	0.58(0.03)	0.34(0.04)
名人	0.65(0.03)	0.35(0.04)	0.57(0.04)	0.31(0.04)

宠物能融入人类的自我吗? 宠物相关信息的记忆加工优势探索

Will you make pets an integral part of your self? An exploration of the memory processing advantage of pet-related information

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

English Version

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 62

相关文章 1

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

被试类型	是	否
养宠人	92	74
非养宠人	54	112

被试类型	是	否
养宠人	92	74
非养宠人	54	112