Stress is pervasive in our society, particularly affecting college students who often face mounting pressure from academic demands, transitioning away from home, and assuming adult responsibilities for the first time (Delgado et al., 2018; Harrar et al., 2010). This stress is furthermore more acute for nursing students, who carry heavy course loads and commute to off-campus clinical sites. Stress has further shown to negatively affect learning outcomes and contribute to significant rates of student attrition or delayed academic progress (Turner & McCarthy, 2017). Amongst various measures aimed at alleviating student stress, universities employ pet therapy programs to foster supportive learning environments and cultivate a homely atmosphere within student housing (Pinto & Foulkes, 2015). In the realm of studies investigating the human-animal bond, particularly with canines, have shown significant effectiveness in reducing perceptions of stress, anxiety, and loneliness (Krause-Parello et al., 2012; Krause-Parello et al., 2016). Particularly within the literature addressing stress among college students, an emerging body of knowledge has begun to shed light on the relationship between college students and stress (Baghurst & Kelley, 2013; Beiter et al., 2015). However, there remains a notable gap in the research concerning animal-assisted therapies for college students. While there are anecdotal accounts supporting the use of family or therapy dogs in university housing to alleviate student distress, such as homesickness, loneliness, and anxiety, there is limited documentation regarding the impact of human-animal interaction on both psychological and physiological student stress (Delgado et al., 2018). To contribute to this literature, the aim of this study by Delgado et al. (2018) was to investigate the impact of interaction with a friendly dog on the stress levels experienced by students, utilising both psychological and physiological measures. The researchers did not explicitly formulate a formal hypothesis. However, their study's objective implies an underlying expectation or hypothesis that engaging with a friendly dog would significantly reduce stress levels among college students. This assumption was likely based on previous research demonstrating the stress-reducing benefits associated with human-animal interactions. Nonetheless, the researchers refrained from explicitly stating this expectation as a testable hypothesis.

The study employed a sample of 48 college students (41 females, 7 males) with a mean age of 24.17 years and ranging from 18-57 years old (Delgado et al., 2018). The diverse sample reflected the university population, comprising 48% nursing majors, 21% other health sciences students, and 31% from non-health programs like business, engineering, and liberal arts (Delgado et al., 2018). Five certified therapy dogs were utilised - a Newfoundland, Labrador retriever mix, standard poodle, Yorkshire terrier, and a 10-month-old Pomeranian puppy in training, working alongside an experienced handler dog (Delgado et al., 2018). The dogs underwent preparation similar to therapy animal hospital visits to ensure good grooming and health (Delgado et al., 2018). Psychological stress was assessed using the 14-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) (Cohen et al., 1983), modified to capture current perceived stress instead of the past month, as well as four 100 mm visual analog scales for rating current mood states of stress, anger, confusion and sadness (Delgado et al., 2018). Physiological markers included blood pressure and heart rate measured via an automated sphygmomanometer cuff, and salivary cortisol levels obtained through saliva specimens collected before and after the intervention (Delgado et al., 2018). The procedure involved individual 15-minute sessions where participants received instructions on acceptable

interactions like petting, sitting/talking with the dog, or playing with provided toys (Delgado et al., 2018). A strict protocol was followed - only handlers could give food/water or take dogs outside, and procedures were in place for terminating interactions if dogs showed distress (Delgado et al., 2018). Psychological measures and physiology data were collected immediately before and 20-30 minutes after each intervention, which was conducted during the high-stress finals week period (Delgado et al., 2018). Saliva samples were chilled, frozen within 4 hours and shipped frozen to a commercial lab for cortisol analysis (Delgado et al., 2018).

The results showed significant reductions in both psychological and physiological stress markers following the canine interactions, thereby supporting the underlying expectation that engaging with friendly dogs would alleviate stress in college students. In terms of psychological measures, mean scores on the Perceived Stress Scale decreased from 34.75 to 31.47 (mean difference 3.28, p=0.001) and all four visual analog scale scores for stress, anger, confusion, and sadness showed large reductions, with the stress scale demonstrating the greatest mean decrease from 70.97 to 41.71 (mean difference 29.26, p=0.001) (Delgado et al., 2018). Physiological data also reflected reduced stress post-intervention, with mean pulse rate dropping from 80.68 to 76.83 beats/min (p=0.039) and mean systolic blood pressure decreasing from 131.09 to 122.79 mmHg (mean difference 8.3 mmHg, p=0.001) (Delgado et al., 2018). Furthermore, salivary cortisol, a key biomarker of stress, showed a significant mean reduction from 0.26 to 0.21 μg/dL (p=0.015) after the dog interactions (Delgado et al., 2018). However, changes in diastolic blood pressure did not reach statistical significance.

Overall, these findings indicating consistent reductions across multiple psychological and physiological stress markers provided support for the expected stress-relieving effects of the canine intervention sessions. Hence, supporting the implicit hypothesis that engaging with friendly therapy dogs would significantly reduce stress levels in the college student participants.

(Delgado et al., 2018). Participants underwent baseline stress assessments before the canine intervention, which could have sensitised or influenced their subsequent responses, thereby limiting generalisations to situations without such pre-test interactions. This situation-specific threat restricts generalising the findings to other populations and real-world contexts where pre-testing is absent.

In conclusion, this study provided important initial insights into the stress-reducing effects of canine interactions for college students. However, several threats to validity were identified that could be addressed to strengthen the rigor and generalizability of the findings. To improve measurement validity, future research should utilize a multi-method assessment approach to capture the full complexity of the psychological and physiological stress experience. Self-report measures alone provide an incomplete picture; incorporating interviews, objective biomarkers such as cortisol assays, and observational data would lead to a more comprehensive evaluation of how stress is impacted. The threat of selection bias from the convenience sampling method could be mitigated through use of random assignment to experimental and control conditions. This would control for any inherent differences between volunteer participants and non-volunteers that may have otherwise explained the observed changes in stress levels. Regarding external validity, pre-testing may have unintentionally sensitized responses; a non-reactive design without baseline assessments prior to the intervention would allow for sounder inferences about real-world applicability. Collectively, implementing these suggested strategies targeting threats to measurement, internal, and external validity would enhance the rigor of research designs examining canine-assisted stress interventions for college students. The findings could then be more validly applied to inform best practices for university wellness programs aiming to foster student retention and welfare through evidence-based approaches like pet therapy. While preliminary, this initial study provides a foundation for continued investigation into multi-pronged stress management solutions leveraging the benefits of the human-animal bond.

References

Baghurst, T., & Kelley, B. C. (2013). An examination of stress in college students over the course of a semester. Health Promotion Practice, 15(3), 438–447.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839913510316

Beiter, R., Nash, R. P., McCrady, M., Rhoades, D. R., Linscomb, M., Clarahan, M., & Sammut, S. (2015). The prevalence and correlates of depression, anxiety, and stress in a sample of college students. Journal of Affective Disorders, 173, 90–96.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2014.10.054

Cohen, S., Kamarch, T. W., & Mermelstein, R. J. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior/Journal of Health & Social Behavior, 24(4), 385–396. https://doi.org/10.2307/2136404

Delgado, C., Toukonen, M., & Wheeler, C. (2018). Effect of canine play interventions as a stress reduction strategy in college students. Nurse Educator, 43(3), 149–153. https://doi.org/10.1097/nne.0000000000000451

Harrar, W. R., Affsprung, E. H., & Long, J. C. (2010). Assessing campus counseling needs. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 24(3), 233–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/87568225.2010.486303

Pinto, L. E., & Foulkes, D. (2015). Well-being and human-animal interactions in schools: The case of Dog Daycare Co-Op. Brock Education, 24(2). https://doi.org/10.26522/brocked.v24i2.395

Turner, K., & McCarthy, V. L. (2017). Stress and anxiety among nursing students: A review of intervention strategies in literature between 2009 and 2015. Nurse Education in Practice, 22, 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2016.11.002

Krause-Parello, C. A., Levy, C., Holman, E., & Kolassa, J. E. (2016). The effects of a VA facility dog on hospitalized veterans seen by a palliative care Psychologist. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049909/6675571

Krause-Parello, C. A., Tychowski, J., González, A., & Boyd, Z. (2012). Human–Canine interaction: Exploring stress indicator response patterns of salivary cortisol and immunoglobulin A. Research and Theory for Nursing Practice, 26(1), 25–40. https://doi.org/10.1891/1541-6577.26.1.25