animal assisted intervention

The synthesis of encounters among autistic children and donkeys: can a mixed methods design show positive outcomes for both species?

Michelle Whitham Jones
Presentation date

Many studies that regard the effectiveness of animal assisted interventions are in fact only interested in the child, assuming that the animals in the research are a homogenous group whose characters and emotional states don’t play a part. Both nonverbal autistic children and donkeys communicate with gesture and often with limited vocalisations.

Both come from a social species and are sentient. Their individual emotional states must affect the other.

This study places both the nonverbal autistic children and the donkeys that facilitate their intervention as equal participants, thus recording both species responses using a qualitative behaviour analyses tool and a multispecies ethnographic approach.

Country

Reframing benefits of equid assisted activities: An analysis of engagement between autistic children and donkeys

Status
Applicant(s)
Collaborator(s)
Research award
Start date
End date
Country
Methodology

Capturing interspecies interactions demanded a methodology that was flexible enough to include children and donkeys as equal participants. Many of the autistic children who took part in this research were non-verbal, therefore the methods utilised for exploring their inner lives and affective states were compatible with those often used to study non-human animals.  

What is lost with some quantitative research methods is the temporal sequence of events during relationship formation which was seen as critical in donkey assisted therapy (DAT) sessions. Capturing individual stories by using multispecies ethnography complemented the quantitative data and offered examples of the context and tangential variables surrounding interactions that would be impossible to control for in a quantitative repeated measures design.  

Aims
  1. To explore if The Donkey Sanctuary donkey assisted therapy program continued to be beneficial for both children and donkeys as the founder Elisabeth Svendsen had intended when she set it up in the mid 1970’s. 

  2. To focus on exploring the child and donkey relationship by viewing both as active participants (much of previous body of work focussed only on the human’s responses). 

  3. To rigorously explore the engagement between child and donkey, with a view to informing practice going forwards. 

Objectives
  1. To develop a Quality of Engagement tool 

  1. To investigate and answer the following questions: a) how does one member of a child-donkey dyad affect the other in equid assisted activities (EAA), and b) do participants act differently with members of their own species as opposed to the other?  

Results

The research confirmed that interspecies engagement can be measured equally for both species and the results can be used as an indicator for welfare and consent of non-verbal participants. It did not, however, show that such engagement reflected outcome benefits. ‘Benefits’ are subjective and dependent on how and of whom the question is asked. Other EAA research has indicated that there are positive ‘benefits’ from EAA, yet they have not included measures of engagement their participants actually experienced. Without a clear indication of engagement between partners, it is not possible to attribute these benefits solely to the EAA. The undefined yet very special ‘thing’ that is so attractive about donkeys and horses should be observed as a concrete variable, such as their emotional state and motivation to engage for the purpose of EAA research. 

The relationship between autistic children and donkeys relies on the uniqueness of each character on any given day. Autism is not a homogeneous description of a person, and whether it is considered a diversity or a diagnosis, it still translates to each person being unique. Both humans and donkeys are individual characters made up by their culture, family group norms, peer norms, genetic makeup, individual histories, and individual personalities. How they will relate to one another is very hard to predict and therefore requires constant monitoring for both welfare and consent. 

Autistic children and donkeys were shown to be a compatible coupling because some of their traits were similar and complemented their interactions. Both cohorts required a calm environment to be able to focus, smooth and fluid movements from others around them and as much time as they needed to process information. EAA is not a lifesaving medical intervention therefore it should only be considered as a practice for those children who show a willingness towards interactions with other species. Equally, some donkeys may find certain individuals or environments distressing and this should be monitored and respected.  

Conclusions

The findings of this research showed that both human and donkey partners were affected by the other and many of those interactions were considered positive, but not all. The donkey participants in this research significantly modified their behaviour to accommodate the children. Donkey behaviour was different when they were with other donkeys showing their awareness of the vulnerabilities of children in EAA sessions. Children were also affected by the other partner in the dyad. Some were generally more aversive towards donkeys than they were to other children which could be attributed to species communication differences however, some children were able to relax more when with donkeys than other children.  

The ethnographic stories highlighted the differences between human-donkey dyads and just how difficult it is to direct individuals towards meaningful relationships within a given environment or timeframe. This is the both the crux and the mystery of EAA. It is the understanding of who the other is and the resulting quality of engagement that dictates the interpersonal experiences within sessions.  

Subscribe to animal assisted intervention