No abstract

Humans and nonhuman animals belong to a network of living things that have existed and interacted for millennia. The Biophilia hypothesis highlights the innate human need for nature contact and connection to ensure human well-being. Evidence suggests that contact with nature and its components, including animals, can both enhance well-being and encourage human concern for nature. The current study details the human wellbeing impact of animals, specifically dolphins. Exploration of eight key informant narratives examined the research question, ''How do interactions with wild dolphins affect human wellbeing?'' Analyses reveal various subthemes clustered into five main themes: Connectedness, Relationships, and Reciprocity; Emotion and Aliveness; Meaning and Making Sense; Accomplishment and Intention; and Harmony and Engagement. There are strong parallels between the identified themes and Seligman's PERMA model. Interpretation of how wildlife experiences benefit humans concluded that the features of life necessary for human flourishing also characterize people's experience with wild dolphins. Practical implications for well-being benefits include health practitioner use of ''nature prescriptions'' and ''wildlife prescriptions,'' which may in turn foster a sense of responsibility and care for nature. However, the parallel dolphin well-being needs to be considered and a balanced and ecocentric view achieved. These areas warrant further research.

No abstract

The nomenclature used to describe animals working in roles supporting people can be confusing. The same term may be used to describe different roles, or two terms may mean the same thing. This confusion is evident among researchers, practitioners, and end users. Because certain animal roles are provided with legal protections and/or government-funding support in some jurisdictions, it is necessary to clearly define the existing terms to avoid confusion. The aim of this paper is to provide operationalized definitions for nine terms, which would be useful in many world regions: “assistance animal”, “companion animal”, “educational/school support animal”, “emotional support animal”, “facility animal”, “service animal”, “skilled companion animal”, “therapy animal”, and “visiting/visitation animal”. At the International Society for Anthrozoology (ISAZ) conferences in 2018 and 2020, over 100 delegates participated in workshops to define these terms, many of whom co-authored this paper. Through an iterative process, we have defined the nine terms and explained how they differ from each other. We recommend phasing out two terms (i.e., “skilled companion animal” and “service animal”) due to overlap with other terms that could potentially exacerbate confusion. The implications for several regions of the world are discussed.