IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v16y2019i17p3113-d261287.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Observing Live Fish Improves Perceptions of Mood, Relaxation and Anxiety, But Does Not Consistently Alter Heart Rate or Heart Rate Variability

Author

Listed:
  • Nancy R. Gee

    (Department of Psychology, State University of New York, Fredonia, NY 14063, USA
    WALTHAM Centre for Pet Nutrition, Leicestershire LE14 4RT, UK
    Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23298-0710, USA)

  • Taylor Reed

    (Department of Psychology, State University of New York, Fredonia, NY 14063, USA)

  • April Whiting

    (Department of Psychology, State University of New York, Fredonia, NY 14063, USA)

  • Erika Friedmann

    (School of Nursing, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA)

  • Donna Snellgrove

    (WALTHAM Centre for Pet Nutrition, Leicestershire LE14 4RT, UK)

  • Katherine A. Sloman

    (Institute of Biomedical and Environmental Health Research, School of Health and Life Sciences, University of the West of Scotland, Paisley PA1 2BE, UK)

Abstract

Although fish and other aquatic species are popular privately-kept pets, little is known about the effects of watching live fish on the perceptions of arousal and the link between those perceptions and physiological measures of arousal. In two separate experiments, participants were asked to watch identically-equipped fish tanks for five minutes in each of three conditions: (1) Live fish, (2) plants and water, and (3) empty tank. Linear mixed models used across both experiments revealed similar results: Greater perceptions of relaxation and mood, and less anxiety during or after viewing the live fish condition, compared with the other conditions. Heart rate and heart rate variability responded to the arousal associated with a math task, but did not differ consistently across viewing conditions. These results suggest that the link between perceptions of arousal, and the physiological measures associated with arousal, may not be strong or immediate, or that heart rate and heart rate variability may not be appropriate measures for the test population. Implications of these results for the biophilia hypothesis and the biopsychosocial model are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Nancy R. Gee & Taylor Reed & April Whiting & Erika Friedmann & Donna Snellgrove & Katherine A. Sloman, 2019. "Observing Live Fish Improves Perceptions of Mood, Relaxation and Anxiety, But Does Not Consistently Alter Heart Rate or Heart Rate Variability," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-15, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:17:p:3113-:d:261287
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/17/3113/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/17/3113/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eleonora Gullone, 2000. "The Biophilia Hypothesis and Life in the 21st Century: Increasing Mental Health or Increasing Pathology?," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 293-322, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Aubrey H. Fine, 2020. "The Psycho-Social Impact of Human-Animal Interactions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-4, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carter, Virginia & Derudder, Ben & Henríquez, Cristián, 2021. "Assessing local governments’ perception of the potential implementation of biophilic urbanism in Chile: A latent class approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    2. B. Grinde, 2002. "Happiness in the Perspective of Evolutionary Psychology," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 331-354, December.
    3. Cora Wagner & Undine E. Lang & Karin Hediger, 2019. "“There Is a Cat on Our Ward”: Inpatient and Staff Member Attitudes toward and Experiences with Cats in a Psychiatric Ward," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-10, August.
    4. Yannick Joye, 2006. "An Interdisciplinary Argument for Natural Morphologies in Architectural Design," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 33(2), pages 239-252, April.
    5. Tarina Levin & Stefan Sjöberg & Bin Jiang & Stephan Barthel, 2023. "Social Sustainability and Alexander’s Living Structure Through a New Kind of City Science," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 224-234.
    6. Helen Berry & Kathryn Bowen & Tord Kjellstrom, 2010. "Climate change and mental health: a causal pathways framework," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 55(2), pages 123-132, April.
    7. Jeffrey Jacob & Emily Jovic & Merlin Brinkerhoff, 2009. "Personal and Planetary Well-being: Mindfulness Meditation, Pro-environmental Behavior and Personal Quality of Life in a Survey from the Social Justice and Ecological Sustainability Movement," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 93(2), pages 275-294, September.
    8. Yarantseva Marina, 2019. "Biophilic cities as a key to sustainability: a case study of Oslo," Prosperitas, Budapest Business University, vol. 6(3), pages 57-65.
    9. Elizabeth Nisbet & John Zelenski & Steven Murphy, 2011. "Happiness is in our Nature: Exploring Nature Relatedness as a Contributor to Subjective Well-Being," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 303-322, April.
    10. Cathrin Rothkopf & Silke Schworm, 2021. "Exploring Dog-Assisted Interventions in Higher Education: Students’ Attitudes and Perceived Effects on Well-Being," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-18, April.
    11. Nick Taylor Buck, 2017. "The art of imitating life: The potential contribution of biomimicry in shaping the future of our cities," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 44(1), pages 120-140, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:17:p:3113-:d:261287. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.