↓ Skip to main content

A Multispecies Approach to Co-Sleeping

Overview of attention for article published in Human Nature, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#6 of 551)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
43 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
57 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
Title
A Multispecies Approach to Co-Sleeping
Published in
Human Nature, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12110-017-9290-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bradley P. Smith, Peta C. Hazelton, Kirrilly R. Thompson, Joshua L. Trigg, Hayley C. Etherton, Sarah L. Blunden

Abstract

Human sleeping arrangements have evolved over time and differ across cultures. The majority of adults share their bed at one time or another with a partner or child, and many also sleep with pets. In fact, around half of dog and cat owners report sharing a bed or bedroom with their pet(s). However, interspecies co-sleeping has been trivialized in the literature relative to interpersonal or human-human co-sleeping, receiving little attention from an interdisciplinary psychological perspective. In this paper, we provide a historical outline of the "civilizing process" that has led to current sociocultural conceptions of sleep as an individual, private function crucial for the functioning of society and the health of individuals. We identify similar historical processes at work in the formation of contemporary constructions of socially normative sleeping arrangements for humans and animals. Importantly, since previous examinations of co-sleeping practices have anthropocentrically framed this topic, the result is an incomplete understanding of co-sleeping practices. By using dogs as an exemplar of human-animal co-sleeping, and comparing human-canine sleeping with adult-child co-sleeping, we determine that both forms of co-sleeping share common factors for establishment and maintenance, and often result in similar benefits and drawbacks. We propose that human-animal and adult-child co-sleeping should be approached as legitimate and socially relevant forms of co-sleeping, and we recommend that co-sleeping be approached broadly as a social practice involving relations with humans and other animals. Because our proposition is speculative and derived from canine-centric data, we recommend ongoing theoretical refinement grounded in empirical research addressing co-sleeping between humans and multiple animal species.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 57 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 20%
Student > Master 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 11%
Lecturer 3 5%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 15 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 21 32%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 8 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 15 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 381. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 September 2023.
All research outputs
#82,794
of 25,706,302 outputs
Outputs from Human Nature
#6
of 551 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,897
of 330,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Nature
#1
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,706,302 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 551 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,704 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them