AZ VOL. 23(2).
qxp:Layout 1 4/2/10 1:47 PM
ANTHROZOS VOLUME 23, ISSUE 2
PP. 185191
Address for correspondence:
Alina Rusu,
Faculty of Psychology and
Sciences of Education,
Babes-Bolyai University,
Cluj-Napoca,
37 Republicii Street, 400015,
Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
E-mail:
alinarusu@psychology.ro
Page 185
REPRINTS AVAILABLE PHOTOCOPYING ISAZ 2010
DIRECTLY FROM PERMITTED PRINTED IN THE UK
THE PUBLISHERS BY LICENSE ONLY
Attitudes of Romanian Pet
Caretakers towards Sterilization
of Their Animals: Gender
Conflict Over Male, but Not
Female, Companion Animals
Roxana I. Cocia and Alina S. Rusu
Faculty of Psychology and Sciences of Education, Babes-Bolyai
University, Romania
ABSTRACT Sterilization of companion animals is in most cases an expres-
sion of the caretakers will. However, little is known about caretakers attitudes
toward pet sterilization in generalthese can influence their decision to ster-
ilize their own animals. Three hundred and twelve Romanian caretakers of
non-sterilized companion animals (194 women and 118 men) were surveyed
before the implementation of a pet management program in Transylvania, the
North-Western part of Romania. The caretakers were administered a ques-
tionnaire that gathered demographic data and measured their general atti-
Anthrozos DOI: 10.2752/175303710X12682332910097
tude toward pet sterilization and their attitude toward the sterilization of their
own pet (male or female). Questionnaires were filled in by caretakers of 202
dogs and 110 cats. Romanian pet owners showed an overall level of slight dis-
agreement toward the sterilization of companion animals. Gender-biased at-
titudes of the Romanian caretakers toward the sterilization of their own pets
emerged only when the sex of the animals was taken into consideration, re-
gardless of the type of pet. Romanian men disagreed with neutering male
pets while Romanian women were more likely to agree with neutering male
pets. No gender difference was detected regarding the spaying of female
pets, with both genders showing a slight level of disagreement. The results are
discussed from sociological, anthropological, and evolutionary perspectives.
Keywords: attitudes, gender conflict, pet management programs, pet
sterilization
Sterilization (desexing, as it is also referred to in some studies,
e.g., Blackshaw and Day 1994) has always been a subject of
debate, whether it was performed on humans or on animals
(Cheney 1995). Sterilization is generally defined as a surgical intervention
185
aimed to permanently remove the gonads (testicles or ovaries) of an
AZ VOL. 23(2).qxp:Layout 1 4/2/10 1:47 PM Page 186

Attitudes of Romanian Pet Caretakers towards Sterilization of Their Animals

individual. When referred to companion animals such as dogs and cats, sterilization is usually
considered a routine medical event that starts and ends with a visit to the veterinarian.
Besides altering the direct fitness of an animal (direct fitness is referred to here as the ability
of an individual to pass on its genes to the next generations through direct reproduction;
Hamilton 1964), sterilization can have other behavioral and physiological consequences, such
as a decrease in territorial marking behavior, a decrease in several behavioral displays related
to reproduction, a decrease in roaming, and an increase in separation anxiety symptoms (Spain,
Scarlett and Houpt 2004). Also, some studies have reported an accelerated cognitive decline
associated with age in sterilized male dogs (Hart 2001). The types of consequences mentioned
above are well documented for cats and dogs, which are the most common domesticated
companion animals (Manning and Rowan 1992; Fielding, Samuels and Mather 2002).
Although sterilization is in many cases seen as an expression of the caretakers will (Man-
ning and Rowan 1992), little is known about caretakers general attitudes toward pet sterili-
zation and how they affect the decision to sterilize their own animal. There are indications that
attitudes towards sterilization and the decision to sterilize per se do not always overlap at the
motivational level, and that attitudes do not always predict the sterilization decisions (Jacoby
and Mattel 1971).
It is generally acknowledged that the level of attachment to companion animals, anthro-
pomorphic attitudes, and attitudes towards sterilization can provide an interaction interface be-
tween caretaker and companion animal, and this interaction may vary according to the
caretakers gender (Serpell 1996, 2003). For example, in the Bahamas, men, more than
women, want to have animals for long-term breeding (Fielding, Samuels and Mather 2002).
Also, in the same study population, men, more than women, refused to neuter their male
companion animal. A survey of the attitudes of dog owners to desexing male and female dogs
in Australia showed a gender bias with regards to several aspects of desexing the animals,
such as male dogs losing their maleness and changing their personality (Blackshaw and Day
1994). In that study, more male than female owners identified with their male dogs sexuality,
and, compared with the male owners, female owners were more positive about all statements
about sterilization of both male and female dogs. However, little is known about the interac-
tion between the gender of the caretaker and the sex of the companion animals in relation to
caretakers general attitude toward sterilization.
The attitude of individuals towards pet sterilization in general is an important dimension to
assess and eventually work on (i.e., in terms of shaping) when trying to implement programs
of companion animal management at the national level. Some societies can be more efficient
than others in properly implementing programs of pet management (i.e., well-being and re-
productive management of companion animals). One can assume that the attitude of pet
caretakers toward sterilization is an important factor to be taken into account when assessing
the level of preparedness of a society to implement pet management programs. Romania has
the status of a young European Union (EU) country, and it currently lacks efficient programs
of pet management. This is due not necessarily to the lack of interest of authorities and
Anthrozos

veterinarians, but mainly to the low motivational level of individuals who do not consider
sterilization a normal component of the humananimal interaction repertoire.
The aim of this study was to analyze two basic attitudinal factors that might explain the poor
behavioral involvement of Romanian pet caretakers in the pet management programs organ-
ized so far at the national level: (1) the general attitude toward sterilization and (2) the attitude
186

toward sterilization of their own companion animals. The data were gathered as part of a larger
AZ VOL. 23(2).qxp:Layout 1 4/2/10 1:47 PM Page 187

Cocia and Rusu

study of Romanian attitudes toward pets. Besides the attitudes toward sterilization, the level
of attachment to animals of the Romanian pet caretakers was individually measured by using
the Lexington Attachment to Pets Scale (Johnson, Garrity and Stallones 1992). No significant
correlation was found between the level of attachment to pets and the attitudes toward
sterilization (data not presented here). To the authors knowledge, this is the first study to
investigate Romanian caretakers attitudes towards pet sterilization prior to the implementation
of a pet management program.

Methods
Participants
Participants were selected based on the criteria of owning a non-sterilized companion animal
(i.e., dogs and/or cats) and on being at least 18 years old. The geographical distribution of the
participants was limited to Transylvania (North-Western part of Romania), and precisely the fol-
lowing cities: Baia Mare, Cluj-Napoca, Cavnic, and Oradea. Among the 312 participants, 194
were women (mean age = 33.77 years, SD = 8.6) and 118 were men (mean age = 34.21
years, SD = 10.2). Questionnaires were completed and gave information on 202 dogs and 110
cats. Among these companion animals, 147 were female and 165 were male. The investiga-
tion was carried out two months before the implementation of a pet management program in
Transylvania (MayJune 2008).
Questionnaire
The questionnaire recorded several demographic characteristics, such as the caretakers age,
gender, and the type (cat or dog) and sex of the companion animal. The caretakers were
asked to refer to only one non-sterilized companion animal when filling in the questionnaire.
Besides the demographic items, the questionnaire included the Lexington Attachment to Pets
Scale (Johnson, Garrity and Stallones 1992) and two items measuring caretakers attitudes
toward sterilization:
(1) A 1-item, 7-point Likert scale measuring the caretakers general attitude to-
ward sterilization: Companion animals should be sterilized. The scale was
ranked from 1 to 7, where 1 = total disagreement and 7 = total agreement.

(2) A 1-item, 7-point Likert scale measuring the caretakers attitude toward the
sterilization of his/her own companion animal (male or female): My own com-
panion animal should be sterilized. The scale was ranked from 1 to 7, where
1 = total disagreement and 7 = total agreement.
Procedure
Prior to the administration of the questionnaire, participants were informed about the minimal
amount of time (about 10 minutes) that would be required to complete it. Participants were
told that the aim of the study was to investigate humananimal relationships. Statistical analy-
sis was carried out using the statistical software SPSS 15 for Windows (Chicago, IL, USA).
Anthrozos

Results
The General Attitude of the Romanian Pet Caretakers towards Sterilization
A three-way ANOVA, 2 (gender) 2 (sex of companion animal) 2 (type of companion
animal), was performed to test whether there was an influence of the caretakers gender on
187

general attitude towards the sterilization of companion animals. The test yielded a main effect
AZ VOL. 23(2).qxp:Layout 1 4/2/10 1:47 PM Page 188

Attitudes of Romanian Pet Caretakers towards Sterilization of Their Animals

of the caretakers gender on general attitude toward sterilization (F(1, 304) = 6.05, p < 0.05). The
mean score of male participants on the Likert scale measuring general attitude towards
sterilization (M = 3.66, SD = 2.19) was significantly lower than the mean score of female par-
ticipants (M = 4.14, SD = 2.05). These results indicate that the Romanian men were less
agreeable than the Romanian women about sterilizing companion animals in general.
The Attitude of the Romanian Pet Caretakers towards the Sterilization of Their
Own Companion Animals
A three-way ANOVA, 2 (gender) 2 (sex of companion animal) 2 (type of companion ani-
mal), revealed a significant interaction effect between the gender of the caretaker and the sex
of the companion animal in relation to attitude towards the sterilization of their own compan-
ion animals (F(1, 304) = 5.10, p < 0.05). This interaction revealed no significant difference between
men (M = 3.8, SD = 2.2) and women (M = 3.9, SD = 1.9) regarding their attitude towards the
sterilization of their own female companion animals (Figure 1). However, a significant difference
between men and women appeared with regard to their attitude toward the sterilization of
male companion animals. The mean scale score for men (M = 3.28, SD = 2.15) was signifi-
cantly lower than the mean scale score for women (M = 4.5, SD = 2.18). These results indicate
that the Romanian men were less agreeable about sterilizing their male companion animals
than the Romanian women (Figure 1). So, in this Romanian sample, the effect of gender on
attitude towards companion animal sterilization was significant only in the case of male com-
panion animals, but not in the case of females.

Female Pet
4.50
Male Pet
Mean Attitude Score

4.25

4.00

3.75

3.50

3.25

Female Male
Gender of the Caretaker

Figure 1. Mean attitude scores (to sterilization of own pet) of male and
female pet caretakers by sex of pet. The higher the score the higher the
agreement with sterilizing own pet.
Anthrozos

Discussion
In many societies, including Romania, the process of sterilization of companion animals is con-
sidered one of the most important tools of pet management programs. However, even though
the local and national pet management programs are highly encouraged through media (i.e.,
newspapers, internet, television etc), the number of Romanian pet caretakers deciding to
188

sterilize their pets is still very low compared with the total number of people that own
AZ VOL. 23(2).qxp:Layout 1 4/2/10 1:47 PM Page 189

Cocia and Rusu

companion animals. As a consequence, the number of abandoned dogs and cats is

dramatically increasing every year in Romania, as well as the number of dog bites incidents.
For example, in 2009, more than 9000 dog bite incidents were reported in Bucharest, the
capital city of Romania, which is the most representative Romanian city in relation to pet
management programs. The present study aimed to measure Romanian caretakers general
attitudes toward pet sterilization and their attitudes toward the sterilization of their own pets,
in order to determine if there were any gender-biased attitudinal aspects that should be
considered when preparing the implementation of national pet management programs.
Similar to previous studies on the effect of human gender on companion animal steriliza-
tion (Fielding, Samuels and Mather 2002), the results of our study support the hypothesis that
caretakers gender influences attitudes towards companion animal sterilization. It is important
to note that in this Romanian sample the gender effect on attitudes towards the sterilization
of own pet was observed only when the variable gender of the caretaker interacted with the
variable sex of the companion animal, regardless of the type of the companion animal.
Romanian women, more than men, agreed with male companion animal sterilization.
Surprisingly, no significant difference was found between Romanian men and women
regarding attitudes towards female companion animal spaying: both sexes slightly disagreed
with the sterilization of female pets. The results of this study show that the sex of the com-
panion animal moderates the relationship between the caretakers gender and attitude toward
companion animal sterilization, but only when male animals are considered.
These results might reflect a conflict between genders that is probably a remnant of the
Communist Regime, experienced by Romanians until 1989. Before 1989, in Romania, labor
laws were designed to protect womens maternal capacities (i.e., reproduction and care for
children), and men were encouraged to value womens housework more than womens
careers (Country Studies Program 2009). While men were seen as independent and career-
oriented individuals, womens independence and feminism were unacceptable. Even though
Romania is now a modern country providing equal access to education and employment for
both genders, it appears that the conflict between genders has persisted. In this study, one
can assume that this gender conflict is reflected in the divergence in attitudes of men and
women towards male animals sterilization. One can infer that Romanian men make gender
projections when it comes to the sterilization of their male pets, while Romanian women show
their position on the gender conflict arena by expressing their agreement towards the
sterilization of male animals. This explanation requires further investigation.
The result that Romanian women agree with the sterilization of male companion animals,
while men disagree with male companion animal sterilization is in accordance with other
studies (Kellert and Berry 1987; Fielding, Samuels and Mather 2002), which took into
consideration the purpose of companion animal acquisition (i.e., companionship, reproduction,
work etc). Usually, men acquire their companion animals for more practical reasons than
women (security or hunting) and, due to these reasons, male companion animals are preferred
by men. After sterilization, the aggression and activity levels of companion animals are usually
Anthrozos

diminished, and it is well known that these two attributes are valuable qualities for security
and/or hunting companion animals, for which they are selected. However, reduced levels of
aggression and activity are usually desirable for companion animals that are acquired for com-
panionship reasons. So, in these cases, one can explain that women, who usually acquire
companion animals for companionship reasons, will consider sterilization as a potential way
189

to reduce the activity and aggression levels of their male companion animals.
AZ VOL. 23(2).qxp:Layout 1 4/2/10 1:47 PM Page 190

Attitudes of Romanian Pet Caretakers towards Sterilization of Their Animals

Another explanation for these results could be offered from an evolutionary perspective. It
is not unusual for men and women to identify their own gender with the sex of a companion
animal, especially when that companion animal is perceived in an anthropomorphic manner
(Kennedy 1992). According to the theory of parental investment (Trivers 1972), reproductive
success is judged differently by males and females, that is, a female needs fewer mating events
to fertilize the eggs she can produce during her entire life, whereas a male has the potential to
fertilize a much higher number of eggs than one female can produce. Typically, across human
cultures, men invest less in their offspring than women (Quinn 1977; Symons 1979; Low 1989).
As in the cases of females of other species that reproduce sexually, women have to support
the costs of internal fertilization, gestation, lactation, and obligatory parenting at least until
weaning time (Kelly 1995; Schmitt 2005). Our results suggest that both Romanian men and
women appear to be aware of the fact that sterilization might have a bigger impact on females
than on males in terms of fitness and parental investment, and therefore the caretakers of
both sexes disagree with the sterilization of females.
Whatever the best explanation is for the gender conflict over the sterilization of male com-
panion animals (i.e., sociological, anthropological, and/or evolutionary), one can conclude that,
in order to assure the efficiency of a pet management program in Romania, the pet caretakers
should be approached in regard to their gender and to the sex of their animals. It is important
to remember here that the decision of sterilization per se is not always a consequence of
general attitudes towards the sterilization of companion animals (Jacoby and Mattel 1971). The
attitude towards sterilization is only a part of the mechanism behind the crucial and irreversible
decision to sterilize a companion animal, which can bring consequences not only for the
companion animal itself, but also to the caretaker, that is, psychological and physiological
consequences such as guilt, sadness, frustration, depression, and an increase in stress.

References
Blackshaw, J. K. and Day, C. 1994. Attitudes of dog owners to neutering pets: Demographic data and effects
of owner attitudes. American Veterinary Journal 71: 113116.
Cheney, V. T. 1995. A Brief History of Castration. Ozone Park, NY: Crucial Concepts.
Country Studies Program. 2009. <http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/rotoc.html> Accessed January, 2009.
Fielding, W. J., Samuels, D. and Mather, J. 2002. Attitudes and actions of West Indian dog owners toward neu-
tering: A gender issue? Anthrozos 15: 206226.
Hamilton, W. D. 1964. The genetical evolution of social behaviour I and II. Journal of Theoretical Biology 7: 116
and 1752.
Hart, B. L. 2001. Effect of gonadectomy on subsequent development of age-related cognitive impairment in
dogs. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 219: 5156.
Jacoby, J. and Mattel, M. S. 1971. Three-point Likert scales are good enough. Journal of Marketing Research
8: 495501.
Johnson, T. P., Garrity, T. F. and Stallones, L. 1992. Psychometric evaluation of the Lexington Attachment to Pets
Scale (LAPS). Anthrozos 5: 160175.
Kellert, S. R. and Berry, J. K. 1987. Attitudes, knowledge and behaviors toward wildlife as affected by gender.
Wildlife Society Bulletin 15: 363371.
Anthrozos

Kelly, R. L. 1995. The Foraging Spectrum: Diversity in Hunter-Gatherer Lifeways. Washington, DC: Smithsonian
Institution Press.
Kennedy, J. S. 1992. The New Anthropomorphism. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Low, B. S. 1989. The evolution of human life histories. In Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, 131161, ed.
C. Crawford and D. L. Krebs. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Manning, A. and Rowan, A. N. 1992. Companion animal demographics and sterilization status. Anthrozos
190

2: 4552.
AZ VOL. 23(2).qxp:Layout 1 4/2/10 1:47 PM Page 191

Cocia and Rusu

Quinn, N. 1977. Anthropological studies on womens status. Annual Review of Anthropology 6: 181225.
Schmitt, D. P. 2005. Fundamentals of human mating strategies. In The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology,
258291, ed. D. M. Buss. New Jersey: John Willey & Sons, Inc.
Serpell, J. A. 1996. Evidence for an association between pet behaviour and owner attachment levels. Applied
Animal Behaviour Science 47: 4969.
Serpell, J. A. 2003. Anthropomorphism and anthropomorphic selection: Beyond the cute response. Society
& Animals 11: 83100.
Spain, C. V., Scarlett, J. M. and Houpt. K. A. 2004. Long-term risks and benefits of early-age gonadectomy in
cats. Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association 224: 372379.
Symons, D. 1979. The Evolution of Human Sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.
Trivers, R. L. 1972. Parental investment and sexual selection. In Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man, 136
179, ed. B. Campbell. Chicago: Aldine.

Anthrozos
191