Mapping Human–Animal Interaction Studies: A Bibliometric Analysis

ABSTRACT

The presence of nonhuman animals in our shared world affects most areas of human activity, both physically and conceptually. The study of human–animal interactions is thus considered a field of great interest, but also of great complexity. In recent decades, it has become manifest in multiple disciplines through many works, intersectionalities, approaches, and methodologies. Our main aim was to provide a useful reference for researchers and other professionals specialized in human–animal interaction studies (HAIS). For researchers from other areas of knowledge, we also aimed to serve as an approximation to the internal coherence and structure of HAIS, contributing to the incorporation of nonhuman animals into their research and advancing their moral consideration through the concept of agency. This paper presents an updated description of the multidisciplinary field of HAIS through a bibliometric study based on the co-occurrence of author keywords, topics, and trends. In this analysis, we found similarities in 60% of the terms used in human–animal studies (HAS) and critical animal studies (CAS), although numerous different terms also emerged. This degree of term co-occurrence was not found with anthrozoology (AZ), which shared only one line of research, related to companion animals, with HAS and which accounted for 13% of the terms used. It had only one common node with CAS.

KEYWORDS:

• Animal studies
• anthrozoology
• bibliometric analysis
• critical animal studies
• human–animal interaction
• human–animal studies

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the editor of Anthrozoös and the anonymous reviewers for their constructive criticisms and for helping edit the paper. Thanks to them, we believe that the text is much clearer and more accessible to any reader.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 Scopus is a citation and abstract database curated by independent subject matter experts. It includes more than 75 million records, more than 24,600 active titles, and more than 196,000 books. For more information about Scopus, see: www.scopus.com

2 While welfarism is a comfortable means of domination in CAS, which reaffirms human superiority, perpetuates speciesism, and legitimizes the injustices committed against nonhumans (Pedersen, 2011), others view welfarism as a way of measuring the conditions with which animals (human and nonhuman) relate to our environment (Broom, 1991). For more information about the confrontation between abolitionist and welfare positions, we recommend reading Svärd (2011).

3 The citation of these multinational corporations is by way of an example and is far from being exclusive. For more information about these agreements and sponsorships, visit the ISAZ website (https://www.delegate-reg.co.uk/isaz2020/sponsorship-exhibition) as well as those of the companies (and their subsidiaries and foundations) cited as examples (https://www.mars.com/made-by-mars/petcare, https://www.fundacion-affinity.org/en/the-foundation/research-chair).