Fetching Felines: A Survey of Cat Owners on the Diversity of Cat (Felis catus) Fetching Behaviour

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3093688/v1

Domesticated animals are famous for the ease with which they can accommodate to diverse human environments and roles, but less well-studied is the ease with which domestic animals can manipulate their human caregivers to their own ends. Here we present the results of a survey of 924 cat owners who report fetching behaviour in 1,154 cats. The overwhelming majority (94.4%) of these owners report that fetching emerged in the absence of explicit training. Fetching was primarily first noticed when the cats were less than one year old (n = 701) or 1 to 7 years old (n = 415). Cats initiated and terminated fetching bouts more often than did their owners. Thus, cats who fetch demonstrate independent and co-ordinated agency in the onset and maintenance of fetching behaviour with their human partners. Additional findings highlight the diversity of objects fetched and the diversity in household demographics. Our thematic analysis reveals owners’ perspectives on (a) the process of a fetching session, (b) the initial acquisition of fetching, and (c) the circumstantial factors that influence fetching patterns. In summary, cats who fetch largely determine when they engage in fetching sessions and actively influence the play behaviour of their owners.

Biological sciences/Psychology

Biological sciences/Zoology/Animal behaviour

Play behaviour

Social play in domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) is a well-documented behaviour with intraspecific play bouts with other dogs and interspecific play bouts with humans [1, 2, 3]. Intraspecific play typically has a competitive element related to dominance, whereas social play with humans is more cooperative and inherently rewarding [1]. Dogs that frequently initiate play with their owners behave with increased dominance and score lower for amenability [4, 5]. These play-initiating dogs may also have the freedom to access all areas of a house, demand attention and beg for food from their owners [5]. The ontogeny of object-based play is relatively understudied [6]. Solitary object play resembles predatory behaviour in morphology, with preferred toys being those that can be torn or ripped apart [1]. Play in puppies develops from solitary object play to social object play at approximately 5 weeks [6, 7], with object play in adult dogs continuing to be predominantly seen in social contexts with other dogs or human partners [8, 9]. The behavioural structure of object play in puppies is similar to that in adult dog play [7, 10]. There are some notable breed differences in solitary play from as young as 7 weeks of age, for example retrievers are more likely to engage in solitary play than livestock-guarding dogs, but social play with other dogs does not appear to differ according to breed [7, 11].

Similarly, play behaviour in domestic cats (Felis catus) resembles hunting behaviour in terms of morphology [10, 12]. Comparable behavioural sequences include a rapid approach and retreat, leaping, chasing, pouncing, and stalking other littermates or objects [13, 14, 15]. Playing typically emerges in the first 2 – 3 weeks of life and is primarily directed towards littermates [16, 17]. Playing then develops more towards object-based play, primarily between 18 and 21 weeks of life, with a gradual decline in object-based play after 21 weeks [17]. This is the opposite development to that of dogs, who transition first from solitary object-based play to social play [6]. There is limited research into how adult cat play is organised and how this may differ from kittens and young cats [18]. Adult indoor cats have been found to be more interested in playing with toys than indoor-outdoor cats [19, 20].

The motivation behind playing in cats is different from that of dogs; cats are more motivated to play with objects that have prey-like features [12, 22, 23] whereas play in dogs usually involves a dog or human partner and is socially motivated [1]. Use of toys is a common way of playing with cats, with lots of variation in the features and type of toy that can be used in these play interactions [21]. Cats have been found to prefer toys similar to the size of a mouse [12, 22], toys that are mobile instead of being stationary (for example, toys attached to rods) [23], and toys that can break or pull apart while the cat interacts with them to maintain engagement [18]. Playing has advantages for both pet cats and owners, for example by acting as a substitute for predation on real animals [24] or preventing aggression towards humans [25].

Fetching and retrieval

“Fetching” can be defined as the retrieval of an object, often thrown by a pet owner [26]. Fetching is a very common social bonding and play activity between owners and domestic dogs that is frequently seen in younger dogs [5, 26, 27, 28]. Playing fetch has also been shown to reduce stress and develop motor skills in dogs [28, 29]. Dogs have been shown to differentially retrieve objects dependent on the owner’s emotional valence towards certain objects [30]. Dogs are also sensitive to attentional cues, such as body posture (facing forwards or backwards) and eye cues (blindfolded or non-blindfolded) in fetching scenarios with their owners [31]. Some dog breeds that score higher on trainability have an increased affinity for fetching and retrieving objects, including the Labrador retriever, Australian shepherd and Doberman pinscher, with the latter two breeds also scoring higher on energy and playfulness than other breeds [32].

Conversely, there is limited research that specifically investigates how or why cats fetch objects. In one anecdotal description of the fetching process itself [33], the owner throws an object for the cat to chase, the cat waits for the owner to get the object themselves and the owner calls the cat’s name to follow them, after which the owner throws the object again. The cat eventually brings the object back to the initial throwing location (although this does not occur every time) and is then met with lots of praise. However, this retrieval behaviour is short-lived as boredom reportedly sets in with both the cat and owner [33]. Fetching behaviour has also been reported by cat owners via questionnaires amongst other tricks such as meowing on command or using the toilet; fetching was reported to be more common than other behaviours such as coming when called or playing games [34, 35]. In a qualitative analysis on play behaviour within cat-human dyads, one owner noted that their cat was “obsessed with fetch. He drops toys on my face in the middle of the night. I don’t want to encourage that as I value my sleep!” [20]. Fetching is typically grouped in with other play activities in owner surveys regarding cat-human play behaviour [20, 36]. However, in the few reports of cat fetching behaviour in the literature, it is unclear whether this behaviour was intentionally trained or occurred spontaneously. It has been suggested that fetching in cats requires training and is shaped on a foundation of the cat’s instinctive behaviours [37].

Fetching has been consistently reported across multiple cat breeds, including domestic shorthair, domestic longhair, mixed breeds and purebreds [35]. In particular, the Siamese, Abyssinian and Himalayan (crossbreed of Siamese and Persian) breeds appear to be some of the most proportionally prevalent retrievers [35]. Tonkinese (crossbreed of Siamese and Burmese) and Devon Rex breeds have been scored significantly higher on playfulness in relation to other breeds [38]. Fetching, specifically, has been reported in the temperament descriptions of Bombay, Burmese, Maine Coon, Savannah, Siamese, and Turkish Van cats in cat breed registries (Cat Fanciers’ Association, https://cfa.org/breeds/; The International Cat Association, https://tica.org/). As such, the Siamese and its crossbreed variations appear to be the most common breeds to display fetching and retrieving behaviours across multiple studies [35, 38].

An example of retrieval in domestic cats that is not linked to play is that of a mother cat who brings prey back to her nest to show her kittens how to hunt independently; the mother cat brings dead prey (and eventually live prey) to the nest and will demonstrate the hunting techniques for her kittens to practice [39, 40]. If the prey escapes the nest, the mother will retrieve the same prey back to the nest for the kittens to continue to practice their hunting skills [41]. Furthermore, a mother cat will attempt to reinstate her kittens’ interest by vocalising to call them to the prey or bringing the prey to them [42]. The maternal instinct to share prey has to be powerful enough to overcome the competing instinct to eat it [37]. Similarly, both male and female adult cats are notorious for bringing dead or alive small mammals, birds and reptiles to their owners as ‘gifts’, with some debate to whether cats also view their owners as kittens or whether the cat brought the prey back to a safe place with the intention to consume it later [43, 44].

Present study

Fetching in cats is a moderately well-documented behavioural phenomenon appearing in anecdotal evidence and in reference to specific cat breeds. We surveyed an international sample of cat owners to explore questions of how fetching first occurs, including whether the cat was intentionally trained, who usually initiates and ends a fetching session, the age of the cat when they first began to fetch and the types of objects that are fetched. We provide descriptive statistics of cat, owner and household demographics and inferential statistics regarding the frequency of fetching sessions per month and number of retrievals in the most recent session. We also asked cat owners to describe the first time they noticed their cat fetching an object, the responses of which were assessed in a qualitative, thematic analysis to get a richer insight into the process of how these cats begin to fetch. Our primary question was the degree to which owners attributed agency to their cats in the initiation and termination of fetching bouts. We were also interested in gaining an understanding of the environmental correlates of fetching in domestic cats. Finally, we wanted to give voice to the owners, considering them as the observers best placed to interpret their cats’ behaviour in developmental context.

Materials

We created an online questionnaire using Qualtrics (Qualtrics, Inc., Provo, UT, USA). The survey was designed to focus specifically on when the owners first noticed the fetching behaviour in their cat. Owners could answer for either a cat they owned in the past or a cat they currently own. The final survey (Supplementary Information S1) consisted of 23 questions relating to: intentional training of the cat (Q5); the objects their cat will fetch (Q6, Q6a); who initiates and ends the fetching sessions (Q7, Q8); and the number of times the cat will fetch in single sessions and on a monthly average (Q9, Q10, Q11). The survey also had two open-ended questions for owners to describe how they trained or noticed the fetching behaviour (Q5a, Q5b). Cat demographic data were collected for the time the fetching behaviour was first seen (age, sex, neuter status, breed, multi-cat household). Owner and household demographic data were also collected for the time the fetching behaviour was first seen (country, number of people in the household, age, gender, dogs present in household, other pets in the household).

Participants

An international sample of survey respondents was recruited via online social media platforms, including Twitter, Facebook and Reddit. A total of 1,258 owners consented to fill out the survey prior to data wrangling. Responses were excluded if not completed in their entirety (n = 334), leaving a total of 924 owner responses for 1,184 cats. Cats with extreme or exaggerated answers were excluded (n = 2). Cats with ambiguous or contradicting responses on the same question were excluded (n = 23). Lastly, one duplicated entry (n = 1) and two duplicated entries with contradicting responses were removed (n = 4), leaving a total of 1,154 cats in the final sample.

The final sample included responses from North America (n = 813), Europe (n = 265), Australasia (n = 34), South America (n = 22), Asia (n = 13), and Africa (n = 4); two respondents noted they and their cat(s) had lived in more than one country. Participants were asked to complete the questionnaire as of the time they first noticed their cat fetching, of which 40 cats first fetched when the respondent was under 18 years old. Respondents were a mean age of 34.73 years (SD = 11.18, range 4 – 73 years as of their cat’s initial fetching bout) and identified as female (n = 748), male (n = 266) or non-binary (n = 109) with some respondents preferring not to say (n = 31).

Data Wrangling

Purebred cat breeds were grouped according to the guidelines from The Cat Fanciers’ Association (https://cfa.org/breeds/). Cats described with the terms ‘domestic shorthair’, ‘domestic longhair’, ‘mixed’, ‘cross-breed’, ‘moggy’, ‘hybrid’ or similar wordings were categorised as ‘mixed breed’. Unknown or non-specific descriptions only relating to coat colour or pattern (e.g., orange cat, calico cat) were categorised as ‘unknown’ due to ambiguity. Cat life stages were categorised into four age groups of kittens (< 1 year), young adult (≥ 1 years and < 7 years), mature adult (≥ 7 years and < 10 years) and senior (≥ 10 years) based on the AAFP-AAHA feline life stage guidelines [45].

Due to an error in the answer type requirements for the cat’s favourite object to fetch (Question 6a), this question allowed for only one description of an object instead of the originally anticipated multiple items. We therefore interpreted responses to this question as owners selecting the cat’s single most favourite object to fetch. Each favourite object was subsequently grouped into one of 14 categories: toys (for humans or cats); spherical objects (e.g. crumpled paper, aluminium foil balls); cosmetics (e.g. hair ties, Q tips); arts and crafts (e.g. pom poms, pipe cleaners/chenille stems); bottle parts (e.g. lids, ring pulls); stationery (e.g. pens, paper clips); consumables (e.g. chew sticks, green pea); springs; twist ties (e.g. bread ties, cable ties); string-like objects (e.g. shoelaces, string); clothing items (e.g. gloves, shoes); ring-shaped objects; scraps (e.g. leather or fabric); and miscellaneous. Any favourite object that was not specifically referred to as a ‘toy’ was grouped in its respective category, for example ‘tin foil ball’ would be grouped with spherical objects and ‘plastic spring’ would be grouped with ‘springs’. Each favourite object was grouped into only one category.

Statistical Analysis

Descriptive statistics were created of household, owner and cat demographics (see Results). Responses with conflicting answers were removed from the specific descriptives of number of dogs in the household (n = 3), number of cats in the household (n = 65) and number of other fetching cats in the household (n = 65).

Data were analysed and figures created using R software (version 2022.07.2+576, https://cran.r-project.org/) using the packages car, coin, DescTools, gmodels, qqplotr, rstatix, sf and tidyverse. R code is available in Supplementary Information S2 and the dataset used is available in Supplementary Information S3. Normality checks were carried out using Shapiro-Wilk tests and assessing QQ plots prior to statistical analysis. Extreme outliers above Q3 + 3 × IQR and Q1 – 3 × IQR were identified. The Shapiro-Wilk tests determined the distributions of the data were significantly different from a normal distribution, thus non-parametric tests were used. Statistical analyses were carried out both including and excluding the extreme outliers; there were no differences in the interpretation of the findings and so the analyses retaining the outliers are reported in the Results section.

Chi-square tests were used to compare frequency counts in who initiated fetching sessions on average (owner, about equal, cat), who ended fetching sessions on average (owner, about equal, cat), and the numbers of female and male cats. Where the Chi-square was significant for variables with more than two levels, three additional Chi-squares were carried out as post-hoc comparisons that compared one level with one other level and were interpreted using a corrected alpha of .016 (.05/3) to reduce Type I error. Chi-square tests were used to compare differences between cat sex (male and female) in who initiates the fetching sessions (owner, about equal, cat) and who ends the fetching sessions (owner, about equal, cat). Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to assess differences between the initiator(s) and ender(s) of the fetching sessions in the number of retrievals in the most recent session, as well as the number of monthly fetching sessions. Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare differences between cat sex in the number of retrievals in the most recent session, as well as to compare differences between cat sex in the number of monthly fetch sessions. Levene’s tests were used to determine the most suitable adjustment method in post-hoc analyses which showed there were not equal variances (p < .05). Thus, pairwise Wilcoxon rank sum tests with Bonferroni corrections were used in post-hoc analyses on significant differences.

Qualitative Analysis

A bottom-up, thematic analysis was carried out on open-ended questions for the qualitative descriptions of how the cat started to fetch and extra comments by the owners (Q5a, Q5b and Q12). The procedure of the thematic analysis followed the steps outlined in published guidance [46]. Initially, the first author (J.F.) familiarised themself with the qualitative responses by reading and re-reading the text descriptions. First-order coding was then carried out in NVivo (R1.6) to identify and label initial descriptive concepts from the text descriptions. Initial codes (n = 268) with 35 subsidiary (“child”) codes were identified at this stage. This was followed by second-order coding with the clustering of related codes to uncover super-ordinate themes. The clustering of related codes was carried out using thematic maps as an aid for the visualisation of the overall themes. Themes were reviewed by (a) reading and assessing the text descriptions in each theme to ensure coherency and internal consistency within the theme itself and (b) comparing the themes with the overall text descriptions to ensure the appropriate themes have been extracted. Relevant themes and sub-themes were selected, clearly defined and named by the authors at the end of this stage (see Supplementary Fig. S4 for the progression of the thematic map).

Ethical Statement

This study was approved by the Science & Technology Cross-Schools Research Ethics Committee at the University of Sussex (project reference: ER/JF337/1). All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to viewing the questionnaire.

Cat and household demographics

The majority of owners reported fetching behaviour by current cats (n cats = 853), while a substantial minority reported fetching behaviour by previous cats (n cats = 301). There were significantly more male fetching cats (n = 617) than female fetching cats (n = 537), X² = 5.50 (1, N = 1,154) p = .018. Most cats were younger than 1 year when their owner first noticed the fetching behaviour (n = 701), followed by cats between the ages of 1 and 7 years (n = 415). Fewer cats first displayed their fetching behaviour at 7 years and above (n = 38). The median age of the cat when fetching was first noticed is 7 months (25^th percentile = 5 months, 75^th percentile = 16 months; range = 0 – 204 months). Most cats fetched 1 – 5 times in the most recent fetching session (n = 635) and had 1 – 10 fetching sessions per month (n = 677). Figure 1 illustrates the dispersion of data for the number of retrievals in the most recent session, number of monthly fetching sessions and the age of the cat when fetching was first noticed. A vast majority of fetching cats (94%) were untrained (n = 1,089) while a minority were intentionally trained (6%, n = 65). Some cats were identified as mixed breed (n = 493), with 160 cats identified as purebred and 501 of unknown breed. A full list of the frequency of all purebreds in our sample can be found in Supplementary Table S5.

Most fetching cats did not share a household with a dog (n = 989). Out of the cats that did share a household with a dog (n = 162), only 106 lived with at least one fetching dog. In contrast, most fetching cats did share a household with at least one other cat (n = 638). However, for the majority of cats who lived with other cats, the other cat(s) did not fetch (n = 479). A summary of owner and household demographics is presented in Table 1 and a full summary of cat and fetching demographics is presented in Table 2.

Favoured objects

The cats’ favourite categorised object to fetch is presented in Fig. 2 and a spreadsheet of all of the objects cats fetched is in Supplementary Information S6. Cat toys were the most frequently cited favourite object type, followed by spherical objects and cosmetics.

Initiation and termination of fetching sessions

There were unequal distributions of who initiates fetching sessions on average (cat, about equal, or owner) (X² = 124.29 (2, N = 1,154) p < .001). Post-hoc comparisons demonstrated that cats (n = 553) initiate fetching sessions more than owners (n = 249), (X² = 115.23 (1), p < .001) and more than when initiation was about equal (n = 352), (X² = 44.64 (1), p < .001). Similarly, owners were significantly more likely to initiate than both the cat and owner equally (X² = 17.65 (1), p < .001).

There were also significant differences between who ends the fetching sessions on average (X² = 329.08 (2), p < .001). Cats (n = 675) terminate fetching sessions more than owners (n = 248), (X² = 197.54 (1), p < .001) and more than when the termination was considered equal (n = 231), (X² = 217.59 (1), p < .001). There was not a significant difference in frequency between the owner and both the cat and owner equally terminating the session (X² = 0.60 (1), p = .437). Thus, cats were depicted by their owners as more frequently the agent that controlled the initiations and terminations of fetching sessions. Figure 3 illustrates the relative proportions of who initiates and who ends the fetching sessions on average.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of household and owner demographics (N = 1,154 cats). Frequencies and percentages are presented along with the mean, SD (in brackets) and ranges of age and duration.

Respondent gender:	Mean respondent age in years (SD):	Number of people in household:	Mean age of household in years (SD):
Female 748 (64.8%)	34.69 (11.41) 6 – 73	1: 220 (19.1%) 2: 565 (49%) 3: 212 (18.4%)	34.80 (9.78) 20 – 73 35.59 (10.91) 0 – 72 36.25 (17.95) 0 – 88
Male 266 (23.1%)	37.22 (11.13) 4 – 64
Non-binary 109 (9.4%) Prefer not to say 31 (2.7%)	29.72 (7.52) 7 – 48 27.09 (7.97) 15 – 40	4: 100 (9.5%)	31.63 (17.69) 0 – 86
		5: 39 (3.4%) 6: 6 (0.5%)	33.55 (20.61) 1 – 87 24.78 (16.12) 2 – 64
		7: 2 (0.2%)	27 (18.68) 10 – 73
Number of dogs in household:	Number of fetching dogs in household:	Number of cats in household:	Number of other fetching cats in household:
0: 989 (85.9%)	0: 56 (34.6%)	1: 451 (41.4%)	0: 479 (75.1%)
1: 103 (8.9%)	1: 81 (50%)	2: 383 (35.2%)	1: 134 (21%)
2: 47 (4.1%)	2: 23 (14.2%)	3: 156 (14.3%)	2: 22 (3.4%)
3+: 12 (1%)	3: 2 (1.2%)	4: 46 (4.2%)	3: 3 (0.5%)
Would cat have seen the dog fetch prior to fetching themselves?		5: 26 (2.4%)
Yes: 34 (32.1%)		6: 12 (1.1%)
No: 72 (67.9%)		7+: 15 (1.4%)

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of cat and fetching demographics (N = 1,154 cats). Frequencies and percentages are presented along with the mean, SD (in brackets) and ranges of age and duration.

Cat sex and neuter status:		Cat status:	Training status:	Breed:
Female spayed 501 (43.4%)		Previous cat 301 (26.1%)	Untrained 1,089 (94.4%)	Mixed 493 (42.7%)
Female intact 36 (3.1%)		Current cat 853 (73.9%)	Trained 65 (5.6%)	Purebred 160 (13.9%)
Male neutered 601 (52.1%)				Unknown 501 (43.4%)
Male intact 15 (1.3%)
Male unknown 1 (0.1%)
Cat age in months at time fetching first noticed (SD):		Life stage at time fetching first noticed:	Duration of time in months the cat had fetched for (SD):
15.90 (23.53) 0 - 204		Kitten (< 1 year) 701 (60.7%)	51.53 (48.72) 0 - 244
		Young adult (< 7 years) 415 (36%)
		Mature adult (< 10 years) 22 (1.9%)
		Senior (≥ 10 years) 16 (1.4%)
Count of who initiates the fetching sessions on average:			Count of who ends the fetching sessions on average:
Cat	553 (47.9%)		Cat	675 (58.5%)
Owner	249 (21.6%)		Owner	248 (21.5%)
About equal	352 (30.5%)		About equal	231 (20%)

Number of retrievals in most recent session

There were significant differences between who usually initiates the fetching sessions and the number of retrievals in the most recent fetching session (Kruskal-Wallis X² = 13.98 (2, N = 1,154), p < .001). There are significantly fewer retrievals if the owner usually initiates the sessions (median = 5, IQR = 4) compared to the cat (median = 5, IQR = 6, Pairwise Wilcoxon p = .009) or if initiation is about equal (median = 6, IQR = 6, Pairwise Wilcoxon p < .001); there is no difference in retrieval number between when the cat usually initiates and when initiation is about equal (Pairwise Wilcoxon p = .995).

There were significant differences between who usually ends the fetching sessions and the number of retrievals in the most recent session (Kruskal-Wallis X² = 110.55 (2, N = 1,154), p < .001). There are significantly more retrievals when the owner ends the sessions (median = 8, IQR = 5) in comparison to when the cat ends the sessions (median = 5, IQR = 4, Pairwise Wilcoxon p < .001) or when both the cat and owner equally end the fetch sessions (median = 6, IQR = 6, Pairwise Wilcoxon p < .001). There are significantly more retrievals when both the cat and owner equally end the fetch sessions in comparison to when the cat ends the sessions (Pairwise Wilcoxon p < .001).

Number of monthly fetching sessions

There were significant differences between who usually initiates the fetching sessions and the number of monthly fetching sessions (Kruskal-Wallis X² = 52.95 (2, N = 1,154), p < .001). There are significantly fewer monthly sessions if the owner usually initiates the sessions (median = 4, IQR = 8) compared to the cat (median = 10, IQR = 16, Pairwise Wilcoxon p < .001) or if initiation is about equal (median = 10, IQR = 16, Pairwise Wilcoxon p < .001) but not between the cat and if initiation is about equal (p = .66).

There are significant differences between who usually ends the fetching sessions and the number of monthly sessions (Kruskal-Wallis X² = 62.97 (2, N = 1,154), p < .001). There are significantly fewer fetching sessions per month if the cat usually ends the sessions (median = 6, IQR = 12.5) in comparison to the owner (median = 10, IQR = 15, Pairwise Wilcoxon p < .001) or if ending is about equal (median = 12, IQR = 20, Pairwise Wilcoxon p < .001). There were no differences in the number of fetching sessions per month between the owner ending the sessions or whether this was about equal (Pairwise Wilcoxon p = 1.00).

Cat sex

There were no significant differences between male and female cats on who usually initiates the fetching sessions (X² (2) = 1.82, p = .403) or who usually ends the fetching sessions (X² (2) = 1.97, p = .374). There were no significant differences between male and female cats on the number of retrievals in the most recent fetching session (Mann-Whitney Z = −1.69, p = .091) or the number of fetching sessions per month (Mann-Whitney Z = − .49, p = .622).

Qualitative Analysis

The analysis generated three themes that are illustrated in Fig. 4.

Fetching process. This theme captures some of the behavioural aspects of the fetching procedure and how and when objects would be retrieved to the owner. Respondents often stated they threw an object (intentionally or unintentionally) after which the cat brought it back to them. Other respondents also stated their cat brought the object to them first after which the owner then threw the object. Cats were noted to have incomplete retrievals, for example in dropping the object halfway between where it landed and where it was first thrown, or in gradually dropping the object further and further away from the owner. This theme also captures how fetching developed from playing and how owners reported they unintentionally threw, dropped or moved objects which also led to the occurrence of fetching. Two respondents noted that they unintentionally moved an object and how their cat reacted:

“In opening a newspaper, the rubber band slipped off and flew down the hallway. Waldo chased it down and brought it back, dropping it at my feet. I 'shot' it again, and again he fetched it.”

“When I was making dinner one evening while she was still a kitten, I dropped some macaroni; she scrambled for a piece and brought it back to me. I [praised] her enthusiastically and a night or two later dropped one to see if she'd do the same. It quickly became her favorite game.”

Acquisition process. This theme captures how the owner first noticed their cat beginning to fetch and retrieve items. Some owners stated they knew their cat was able to fetch prior to adoption (for example, if adopted from a family friend or from a shelter that knew about this behaviour). A small proportion of owners intentionally trained their cat to fetch objects using clicker training or reward-based techniques with food or social rewards. Some owners believed their cats could have learnt to fetch from other animals (including siblings, parents, offspring, unrelated conspecifics, and dogs) or that the cat trained them to play fetch. However, many owners stated their cat opportunistically started fetching or retrieving objects to them. One respondent stated that they knew their cat could fetch prior to adoption, a second respondent wrote how they used clicker training and a third respondent explained how their cat trained them:

“Her former owner first noticed it, but told me that Tiny would bring back balls of paper on her own. The first night I brought her home I tried tossing a ball of paper and she brought it right back!”

“She would always chase the baubles but wouldn't bring them back, she would sometimes pick them up in her mouth and take them somewhere better to bat around before she'd meows at you to throw it again so I started to try catching her when she had the bauble in her mouth and calling her to come. If she came with the bauble she got the click and the treat if not she didn't, just got lots of love for coming when called. Treats were not required as motivation for very long once she understood.”

“Dizzy would bring a toy (a mouse, a bundle of feathers, etc.) to me, drop it at my feet, and then attack the toy -- and my ankles. Not being terribly fond of having my ankles bitten ferociously, I would toss the toy a few feet away and encourage Dizzy to play attack it somewhere else. She'd chase it and almost inevitably bring it back, attack again, and so on. Eventually I realized she was chirping and making eye contact as she brought the toy back and (briefly) sitting patiently after she dropped it, and that her attacking my ankles was her way of asking me to get on with throwing the toy. Once I caught on -- that is to say, once she trained me -- we got into a good routine where I'd throw it, she'd chase it and bring it back and then prepare to pounce while I play-feinted and eventually threw it. Rinse, repeat.”

Fetching under specific circumstances. This theme describes how some cats would fetch only under specific circumstances related to the nature of the fetching session. Some cats would fetch an object only if the object was thrown far enough away from the initial thrown location. Some cats were reported to fetch only a few times in one session, whereas others were reported to fetch obsessively for great lengths of time. Some cats were interested in fetching only one specific object, despite, for example, the owner providing an identical toy of a different colour which the cat would not play or fetch with. Some cats would fetch only in specific locations of the house; two common locations were the bedroom (of which cats were sometimes reported to drop the object in the owner’s bed while the owner was asleep) and throwing the object using the stairs for the cat to chase up and down. Some cats were also reported to fetch only with specific people in the household. One respondent reported that their cat will fetch only with a specific object and a second respondent explained that their cat enjoys playing fetch in two locations:

“She's very particular about what she'll fetch, however. She'll smack anything around, but if you want to play fetch it HAS to be this one type of cosmetic swab. (It's like a Q-tip, but much thinner. Used for eyelash extensions. Tulip is interested in regular Q-tips, but she won't fetch them).”

“She only likes playing in one of two places - the best place is in our bedroom, we throw the ball out of the door down the hall and into the bathroom. There’s a step she can leap over which she likes doing - the second place is from the bottom of the stairs going up into the bathroom or vice versa. If we are trying to tire her out, we both play with her throwing it up and down the stairs”

Our survey of 924 owners of fetching cats reveals that fetching is a diverse cat behaviour which is not geographically restricted. For the majority of cats who fetch (94.4%), it is not a trained behaviour. Most cats who fetch first display this behaviour as kittens or young adults. Cats have individual preferences for a variety of objects to fetch and they exhibit agency in the initiation and ending of fetching sessions. Owners also provided detailed descriptions of the fetching process itself and highlighted how some cats will fetch only in certain circumstances.

Cats had fewer retrievals in the most recent session if the owner (vs the cat) usually initiates the sessions. Similarly, cats had fewer sessions per month if the owner (vs the cat) usually initiates the sessions. Comparatively, other research has found that if the owner initiates play, including fetch, the cat had the lowest total daily play time [20]. On the other hand, cats had more retrievals in the most recent session and more fetching sessions per month if the owner ended the sessions on average. This suggests that cats are largely in control of the fetching sessions; when cats initiate sessions, they have more retrievals in the most recent session and more sessions per month. When cats end sessions, they have fewer retrievals and fewer monthly sessions. This may be interpreted as some owners being forced to end sessions because the cat will otherwise fetch for a lengthy period of time; owners of other cats may be continually encouraging the cat to keep playing for longer than the cat themselves would have done otherwise. Comparatively, in one survey on play and dominance, 58% of dogs had been found to be the initiator of fetch [5], whereas our results identified that 47.9% of cats were the initiator. Furthermore, when dogs control the initiation of a play session, they behave with increased dominance over their owner and may attempt to manipulate their owners in other aspects, for example by demanding attention and begging for food [4, 5]. These are familiar traits for cats who often beg for food and demand attention from their owners, leaving owners to also feel a loss of control over feeding time [47, 48].

There were significantly more male cats than female cats in our sample. However, male and female cats did not differ in who initiated or ended the fetching sessions on average, or the number of retrievals in the most recent session or the number of fetching sessions per month. Despite the similar behavioural morphologies of playing and hunting, the lack of sex differences suggests that fetching with human partners is primarily motivated by play across both sexes, as opposed to caregiving or teaching behaviour as seen in mother cats for their offspring [39, 40, 41, 42]. Additionally, owners frequently referred to fetching as a play activity in their own descriptions of how fetching first occurred.

Dedicated cat toys accounted for less than 40% of the cats’ favourite objects to fetch. Instead, other objects made or thrown opportunistically (such as crumpled paper) or other random objects around the house (such as hairties, bottle parts) make up the majority of the favourite objects to fetch. Miscellaneous items also made up 8% of the cats’ favourite objects to fetch, including cat costumes, cigarette packets, earplugs, straws and playing cards. This demonstrates that cats are capable of fetching a highly diverse range of objects that are available to them and are not limited to objects specifically made for cats or objects that have only prey-like qualities, such as being easily torn apart [18].

While a minority of fetching cats lived in households with either dogs who fetched (n = 106) or other fetching cats (n = 159), the majority did not live with other such animals. Some owners described the possibility that their cat could have learned the fetch behaviours from another animal; however, not all cats in the sample necessarily had such an opportunity. It should be noted that social learning in cats is relatively understudied and has limited direct evidence of cats copying from other species [49, 50]. Thus, the extent to which fetching specifically is socially learned (from other animals) versus self-constructed is yet to be determined.

To target our specific research questions, our survey was designed only for owners who currently own or previously owned fetching cats. While our survey identified a large number of fetching cats, we do not have information about the overall prevalence of this behaviour in the species. Furthermore, our sample contained only 160 purebred cats. The Siamese breed was the most frequently reported fetching cat out of all the purebreds (n = 36). Despite the relatively small number of purebred cats in our sample, this is consistent with what previous research has found in relation to the Siamese and crossbreed variations being amongst the most common fetching breeds [35, 38]. However, fetching is by no means restricted only to certain breeds of cats, as indicated by the large majority in our sample of 493 mixed breeds. It is important to note that many owners did not know or state the exact breed of their cats (n = 501) and as such this is a limitation of the present research. Future studies should aim to assess the prevalence of fetching in the wider cat population by including non-fetching cats and recruit a more representative sample of purebred cats to help determine whether fetching is more common amongst the Siamese purebred or crossbreed variations, as has been supported in our findings and in previous research [35, 38].

Owners were asked to write their own descriptions of how they first trained their cat to fetch or how they first noticed their cat fetching objects. As a result of this, it was not clear who first displayed interest in fetching – whether this was solely the owner, solely the cat or a combination of both the owner and the cat. Some owners described the first fetching instance as themselves throwing the object and the cat subsequently retrieving the object, whereas other owners described themselves throwing the object after the cat had first brought them an object. To understand the exact process of this initial fetching bout, future research should consider asking specific questions on who first displayed interest in the fetching process.

In summary, our results demonstrate there is lots of individual variation in cat fetching behaviour regarding the type of object retrieved, the number of retrievals and the number of fetching sessions per month. Fetching is not restricted by the sex, breed or location of the cat. An overwhelming majority of cats were untrained in this behaviour and most were kittens or young adults when fetching was first noticed. The agency of fetching lies predominantly with the cat, who is largely in control of a fetching session with their owner and determines how exactly they wish to participate in the fetching session.

Data availability statement

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article (and its Supplementary Information files).

Acknowledgements

We thank all of the cat owners who shared and completed our survey. We acknowledge two of the authors’ fetching cats, Bertha and Bear, for inspiring this research. We would also like to thank Elea Drews-Windeck for translating text entries written in Spanish and Martina Sladekova for her assistance in creating figures in R.

Author contributions

Conceived study and designed questionnaire: JF, DL, ER. Collected and wrangled data: JF. Coding and analysis: JF, ER. Wrote the paper: JF, ER, DL.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Bradshaw, J. W., Pullen, A. J., & Rooney, N. J. Why do adult dogs ‘play’?. Behavioural processes, 110, 82–87. (2015).
Rooney, N. J., Bradshaw, J. W., & Robinson, I. H. A comparison of dog–dog and dog–human play behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 66(3), 235–248. (2000).
Ward, C., & Smuts, B. B. Why does carnivore play matter. Journal of Developmental Processes, 2, 31–38. (2007).
O'Farrell, V. Manual of canine behaviour (2nd ed.). Cheltenham, England: British Small Animal Veterinary Association. (1992).
Rooney, N. J., & Bradshaw, J. W. Links between play and dominance and attachment dimensions of dog-human relationships. Journal of applied animal welfare science, 6(2), 67–94. (2003).
Davis, K. M., Partin, A. M., Burghardt, G. M., Springer, C. M., & Albright, J. D. A Descriptive Methodology for Studying the Ontogeny of Object Play and Breed Differences in Dogs (Canis lupus familiaris). Animals, 13(8), 1371. (2023).
Burghardt, G. M., Albright, J. D., & Davis, K. M. Motivation, development and object play: comparative perspectives with lessons from dogs. Behaviour, 153(6–7), 767–793. (2016).
Rooney, N.J. Play Behaviour of the Domestic Dog Canis Familiaris, and Its Effects upon the Dog-Human Relationship. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Southampton). (1999).
Pullen, A. J. (2011). Behavioural indicators of candidate enrichments for kennel housed dogs (Doctoral dissertation, University of Bristol).
Hall, S. L. Object play by adult animals. Animal play: Evolutionary, comparative, and ecological perspectives, 45–60. (1998).
Mehrkam, L.R.; Hall, N.J.; Haitz, C.; Wynne, C.D.L. The influence of breed and environmental factors on social and solitary play in dogs (Canis lupus familiaris). Learn Behav. 45, 367–377. (2017)
Hall, S. L., Bradshaw, J. W., & Robinson, I. H. Object play in adult domestic cats: the roles of habituation and disinhibition. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 79(3), 263–271. (2002).
West, M. Social play in the domestic cat. American Zoologist, 14(1), 427–436. (1974).
Bateson, P., & Barrett, P. The development of play in cats. Behaviour, 66(1–2), 106–120. (1978).
Biben, M. Predation and predatory play behaviour of domestic cats. Animal Behaviour, 27, 81–94. (1979).
Caro, T. M. Predatory behaviour and social play in kittens. Behaviour, 76(1–2), 1–24. (1981).
Mendoza, D. L., & Ramirez, J. M. Play in kittens (Felis domesticus) and its association with cohesion and aggression. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 25(1), 27–30. (1987).
Delgado, M., & Hecht, J. A review of the development and functions of cat play, with future research considerations. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 214, 1–17. (2019).
Pyari, M. S., Uccheddu, S., Lenkei, R., & Pongrácz, P. Inexperienced but still interested–Indoor-only cats are more inclined for predatory play than cats with outdoor access. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 241, 105373. (2021).
Henning, J. S. L., Nielsen, T., Fernandez, E., & Hazel, S. Factors associated with play behavior in human-cat dyads. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 52, 21–30. (2022).
Strickler, B. L., & Shull, E. A. An owner survey of toys, activities, and behavior problems in indoor cats. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 9(5), 207–214. (2014).
Hall, S. L., & Bradshaw, J. W. The influence of hunger on object play by adult domestic cats. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 58(1–2), 143–150. (1998).
Shreve, K. R. V., Mehrkam, L. R., & Udell, M. A. Social interaction, food, scent or toys? A formal assessment of domestic pet and shelter cat (Felis silvestris catus) preferences. Behavioural processes, 141, 322–328. (2017).
Ellis, S. L. et al. AAFP and ISFM feline environmental needs guidelines. Journal of feline medicine and surgery, 15(3), 219–230. (2013).
Overall, K. Manual of Clinical Behavioral Medicine for Dogs and Cats-E-Book. Elsevier Health Sciences. (2013).
Bradshaw, J. W., Pullen, A. J., & Rooney, N. J. Why do adult dogs ‘play’?. Behavioural processes, 110, 82–87. (2015).
Rooney, N. J., Bradshaw, J. W., & Robinson, I. H. A comparison of dog–dog and dog–human play behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 66(3), 235–248. (2000).
Sommerville, R., O’Connor, E. A., & Asher, L. Why do dogs play? Function and welfare implications of play in the domestic dog. Applied animal behaviour science, 197, 1–8. (2017).
Horowitz, A., & Hecht, J. Examining dog–human play: the characteristics, affect, and vocalizations of a unique interspecific interaction. Animal cognition, 19(4), 779–788. (2016).
Turcsán, B., Szánthó, F., Miklósi, Á., & Kubinyi, E. Fetching what the owner prefers? Dogs recognize disgust and happiness in human behaviour. Animal cognition, 18(1), 83–94. (2015).
Gácsi, M., Miklósi, Á., Varga, O., Topál, J., & Csányi, V. Are readers of our face readers of our minds? Dogs (Canis familiaris) show situation-dependent recognition of human’s attention. Animal cognition, 7(3), 144–153. (2004).
Serpell, J. A., & Duffy, D. L. Dog breeds and their behavior. In Domestic dog cognition and behavior (pp. 31–57). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. (2014).
McNamee, T. The Inner Life of Cats: The Science and Secrets of Our Mysterious Feline Companions. Hachette UK. (2017).
Grigg, E. K., & Kogan, L. R. Owners’ attitudes, knowledge, and care practices: Exploring the implications for domestic cat behavior and welfare in the home. Animals, 9(11), 978. (2019).
Voith, V. L., & Borchelt, P. L. Social behavior of domestic cats. Compendium Small Animal, 8(9), 637–646. (1986).
Henning, J., Nielsen, T., Fernandez, E., & Hazel, S. Cats just want to have fun: Associations between play and welfare in domestic cats. Animal Welfare, 32, e9.
Budiansky, S. The character of cats. Hachette UK. (2015).
Wilhelmy, J., Serpell, J., Brown, D., & Siracusa, C. Behavioral associations with breed, coat type, and eye color in single-breed cats. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 13, 80–87. (2016).
Baerends-van Roon, J. M., & Baerends, G. P. The morphogenesis of the behaviour of the domestic cat, with a special emphasis on the development of prey-catching. North-Holland Publishing Company. (1979).
Crowell-Davis, S. L. Cat behaviour: social organization, communication and development. In The welfare of cats (pp. 1–22). Springer, Dordrecht. (2007).
Leyhausen, P., & Tonkin, B. A. Cat behaviour. The predatory and social behaviour of domestic and wild cats. Garland STPM Press. (1979).
Caro, T. M. Predatory behaviour in domestic cat mothers. Behaviour, 74(1–2), 128–147. (1980).
Bradshaw, J. Cat sense: The feline enigma revealed. Penguin UK. (2013).
Morris, D. Catwatching: The Essential Guide to Cat Training (London: Jonathon Cape). (1986)
Quimby, J. et al. 2021 AAHA/AAFP feline life stage guidelines. Journal of Feline Medicine and Surgery, 23(3), 211–233. (2021).
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77–101. (2006).
Levine, E. D., Erb, H. N., Schoenherr, B., & Houpt, K. A. Owner's perception of changes in behaviors associated with dieting in fat cats. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 11, 37–41. (2016).
Downes, M. J., Devitt, C., Downes, M. T., & More, S. J. Understanding the context for pet cat and dog feeding and exercising behaviour among pet owners in Ireland: a qualitative study. Irish veterinary journal, 70(1), 1–10. (2017).
Adler, H. E. Some factors of observational learning in cats. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 86(1), 159–177. (1955).
Fugazza, C., Sommese, A., Pogány, Á., & Miklósi, Á. Did we find a copycat? Do as I Do in a domestic cat (Felis catus). Animal Cognition, 24, 121–131. (2021).

No competing interests reported.

Fetching Felines: A Survey of Cat Owners on the Diversity of Cat (Felis catus) Fetching Behaviour

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Main text

Methods

Results

Discussion

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1