RESUMO
Therapy animals in clinical settings are purported to reduce patients' anxiety, decrease agitated behaviour, serve as social mediators, enhance the social atmosphere, and increase patients' openness towards practitioners. A therapy dog worked alongside her exercise physiologist handler for approximately 1 day/week in a university clinic. The canine and handler functioned as a team, while the handler simultaneously undertook supervision of students. The clinic was open 24 h/week, and no other therapeutic animal was present for any part of the week. We explored, via surveys and interviews, human responses to the dog. The survey comprised 15 statement items regarding the canine's role, behaviour, and acceptability in the clinic, ranked from strongly disagree (-2) to strongly agree (2), followed by an open item inviting participants to follow up interviews. Eleven (11) clinical clients and seven (7) students completed the survey. One client had not encountered the canine; these data were excluded. Four (4) participants from the client sample provided subsequent telephone interviews. All participants identified the canine as well-behaved; no participants considered that she detracted from their exercise sessions. Most participants were equivocal to statements regarding social lubrication and openness to practitioners; only three clients and two students identified that they felt more willing to share health information; three students identified that they felt they could confide more in the canine than in the practitioner. Interviewees' reports were similarly favourable, reinforcing the information obtained from the surveys. Interview transcripts were subject to thematic analysis, which focussed around four key themes: (1) the canine's good behaviour, (2) clients giving permission, and the canine as both (3) a pleasant distraction from the effort of exercise, and (4) nice to have. A therapy dog may enhance some aspects of exercise physiology service delivery.
RESUMO
Logical connectives (e.g., or, if, and not) are central to everyday conversation, and the inferences they generate are made with little effort in pragmatically sound situations. In contrast, the neural substrates of logical inference-making have been studied exclusively in abstract tasks where pragmatic concerns are minimal. Here, we used fMRI in an innovative design that employed narratives to investigate the interaction between logical reasoning and pragmatic processing in natural discourse. Each narrative contained three premises followed by a statement. In Fully-deductive stories, the statement confirmed a conclusion that followed from two steps of disjunction-elimination (e.g., Xavier considers Thursday, Friday, or Saturday for inviting his girlfriend out; he removes Thursday before he rejects Saturday and declares "I will invite her out for Friday"). In Implicated-premise stories, an otherwise identical narrative included three premises that twice removed a single option from consideration (i.e., Xavier rejects Thursday for two different reasons). The conclusion therefore necessarily prompts an implication (i.e., Xavier must have removed Saturday from consideration as well). We report two main findings. First, conclusions of Implicated-premise stories are associated with more activity than conclusions of Fully-deductive stories in a bilateral frontoparietal system, suggesting that these regions play a role in inferring an implicated premise. Second, brain connectivity between these regions increases with pragmatic abilities when reading conclusions in Implicated-premise stories. These findings suggest that pragmatic processing interacts with logical inference-making when understanding arguments in narrative discourse.