July 4, 2025, 9:09 am | Read time: 6 minutes
Pets are often seen as comforters for the soul. But how much do they really impact our well-being—especially during times of crisis? A new long-term study from Hungary reveals surprising connections: While mood significantly improves shortly after acquiring a pet, this effect doesn’t last long.
During the pandemic, many people fulfilled their desire for a pet. This was not only because home office regulations and lockdowns gave them plenty of time to care for a dog, cat, or rabbit around the clock. Some also felt lonely due to the significantly reduced social contacts.
Regardless of why people got a pet during the pandemic, the expectation was often that it would make them happier. Initially, this was true for many. However, particularly among dog owners, the mood shifted, as a study from Hungary shows. According to the study, many owners felt less active, calm, and satisfied after a few months. PETBOOK summarizes the intriguing results.1
Study Differs Significantly From Previous Work
The new study was conducted by a research team from Eötvös Loránd University in Budapest and published in the scientific journal “Scientific Reports.” It analyzed the impact of acquiring and losing pets on well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This study differs significantly from previous work: Over 2,700 participants were selected representatively—regardless of their love for animals or caregiving role. This allowed the research team to examine for the first time how simply living with a new pet affects emotional and psychological well-being during an exceptional situation like a global crisis.
Also interesting: Which pets have experienced a boom since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic
New Study Aimed to Avoid Previous Methodological Weaknesses
Previous studies on pets and well-being yielded contradictory results. Many investigations used cross-sectional data and focused on dedicated animal lovers, which limited their significance. Additionally, pet ownership was often imprecisely defined, or the selection of participants skewed the picture—such as by focusing on people who wanted to adopt a dog. Positive effects often disappeared when socioeconomic differences were considered.
The new study aimed to avoid these methodological weaknesses. Using an objective, population-representative panel in Hungary, the researchers examined not only short-term euphoria effects but also longer-term changes. Differences by animal type (dog, cat, others) were also considered. Another research aspect was whether people with lower well-being were more inclined to acquire a pet—whether psychological condition is a motivator for getting a pet.
What Was Studied—and How?
The study followed 2,783 Hungarian adults over three time points during the COVID-19 pandemic (March to October 2020). Participants were selected from a representative online panel that reflects the population by gender, age, education, and place of residence. The goal was to measure changes in well-being when a new pet entered the household or a pet was lost.
The study did not focus on those primarily responsible for the pet but on households in general. Pet acquisition was defined as the introduction of a new pet, and pet loss as its departure (e.g., through death or transfer). Psychological condition was measured using several established scales (including the WHO-5 Well-Being Index), and the data were standardized to account for general pandemic effects.
After 6 Months, Well-Being Declined Among Dog Owners
Only 65 of 2,783 households (2.3%) acquired a new pet during the study, while 75 households (2.7%) lost a pet. After acquiring a pet—especially in the first one to four months—happiness increased significantly (p < 0.01). However, this positive effect was only measurable in the short term. In the medium and long term (up to six months), new dog owners experienced a decline in well-being in several areas: activity, calmness, life satisfaction, and overall well-being decreased.
New cat owners also became less active. In contrast, people who acquired another type of pet (e.g., rodents) showed slightly increased activity. Interestingly, the loss of a pet—regardless of the type—had no measurable impact on psychological well-being. Additionally, there was no evidence that people with low well-being specifically acquired pets to improve their mood.
Pets Did Not Improve Well-Being Permanently
The study refutes the widespread assumption that pets automatically and permanently improve psychological well-being. While a pet can bring joy in the short term, the burdens apparently outweigh the benefits in the long term, especially with dogs. Possible reasons include excessive expectations, everyday challenges, and lack of preparation for responsibility. The decline in positive mood after the initial euphoria could also result from disappointment over unmet expectations.
The results underscore that the so-called “pet effect” is context-dependent: In crisis times like the pandemic, with increased stress and uncertainty, pets apparently have different effects than under normal circumstances. Additionally, the type of pet plays a central role: While owning dogs tends to be burdensome, other animals seem neutral or even slightly positive. For research, this means that future studies must be more differentiated and conducted under realistic conditions.
Despite Data Collection Weaknesses, the Result Is Clear
The study impresses with its methodology: representative sample, longitudinal data collection over three time points, statistically sound analyses with GLMM and bootstrapping. The exclusion of animal enthusiasts as a target group increases its significance. However, there are limitations: The data come from the pandemic situation—an exceptional circumstance that could have strongly influenced emotional experiences. Additionally, it was unclear whether participants were actually the primary caregivers for the pet.
The group size of pet acquirers was also small (only 65 people), which limits generalizability. On the positive side, many of the recorded pets were rated as emotionally significant by their owners. Another point: The animal types in the “other” category were not specified, complicating interpretation. Additionally, there is no information on the duration of pet ownership before loss. Overall, the central result remains clear: The often-touted, sustainable psychological benefit from pets is by no means guaranteed—especially not in challenging life phases.
Survey Assesses How Burdonsome “Pandemic Puppies” Are for Their Owners
New Study Reveals Which Dogs Have the Highest Cancer Risk
Human and Horse Hearts Beat in Sync During Animal-Assisted Therapy
Conclusion: Those Getting a Pet Should Not Rely on Immediate Emotional Relief
The Hungarian long-term study clearly shows: Pets bring short-term joy, but not necessarily more well-being in the long term—especially not with dogs. The loss of a pet had no measurable effects on mental health during the study period. For research, this means that only differentiated, realistic studies can capture the actual impact of animals on humans.
For animal lovers: Those getting a pet should not rely on immediate emotional relief but should keep long-term challenges in mind—and be well-prepared.