Pet dogs, therapy dogs, and service dogs can be seen in workplaces with increasing frequency. Although dogs may provide many benefits to employees and employers, their presence may introduce additional hazards and concerns to the work environment. Therefore, decisions to accept dogs in the workplace may include many considerations including the health, safety, and well-being of employees, legal and cultural sensitivities, and animal welfare. The present paper serves to introduce the issue of dogs in the workplace and outline the potential benefits and challenges to their presence. The legal accommodations afforded to certain types of dogs in workplace settings are discussed, and the research findings pertaining to the potential benefits of dogs on human health and well-being are summarized. The paper concludes with considerations for human resource management personnel in the areas of diversity, employee relations, ethics and corporate responsibility, organizational and employee development, safety and security, and legal considerations, as well as suggested topics for future research.

Therapy and visitation dogs are becoming more common on college campuses to provide comfort and support to students, but little attention has been given to the concerns of faculty and staff who share space with the dogs in their workplaces. The purpose of this study was to assess the perceptions of faculty and staff with regard to both the benefits and the hazards (e.g., dander, bites, fleas) and risks associated with the presence of visitation dogs in their workplaces. One hundred and thirty-eight employees who worked in buildings with resident visitation dogs completed an online survey about their perceptions of the hazards and risks of the dogs and the effects of dogs on the wellbeing of both students and employees. In general, employees perceived that the dogs presented minimal risks, and most employees believed that they can reduce stress and provide comfort to students on campus. There were a few employees, however, who reported that the dogs did not improve the work environment and conferred no benefits to the staff or students. The findings of the present survey support the mostly positive attitudes that people have for dogs in the workplace, but they also highlight a potential challenge: accommodating individuals who believe very strongly that dogs do not belong in work environments.

Objective: Texting while driving is a dangerous behavior. Drivers continue to engage in the behavior despite knowing its risks, and the factors responsible for the decision to text while driving are poorly understood. This study examined how the relationship of the sender to the driver, in addition to the delay to the destination, may affect the decision to text while driving with the use of a social- and delay-discounting paradigm. Methods: Ninety-four (N = 94) undergraduate students completed a hypothetical social- and delay-discounting task in which they rated their likelihood of replying to a text message immediately versus waiting to reply until arriving at a destination. The social distance of the sender and the delay to the destination were varied across trials. Results: For both social and delay discounting, the likelihood of replying and waiting, respectively, decreased as a function of social distance and delay to the destination. Participants were more likely to text while driving as the social distance of the sender decreased and the delay to the destination increased. Social discounting varied inversely as a function of delay to the destination: The shorter the delay to the destination, the greater the social discounting. Conclusion: The findings indicate that social distance of the sender is an important factor involved in the decision to text while driving. Participants were more likely to reply to a text while driving if the sender was less socially distant. When they were closer to their destination, they were less likely to reply to socially distant people than those closer to them. The roles that social consequences play in drivers’ decision making to text while driving are discussed.