Despite an increased interest in animal/human bonding within the last decade, a review ( 3 ) of the many studies yielded only two (1, 2 ) which reported negative effects of pet ownership. Others demonstrated positive effects, e.g., ipcreased physical and mental well-being, on humans. When older people and children were given pets, self-esteem increased and adults with pers were better adjusted emotionally than those without pets. Most studies, however, measured self-esteem before and after pet acquisition or concerned owners already deeply involved with their pets, subjects often being selected by veterinarians or at pet shows. As most owners do not show their pets or even take them to veterinarians ( 5 ) , the present study investigated the more casual pet ownership of those who are less intensely involved or concerned with their animals than the subjects of previous studies. Based on the literature, adult animal-owners were expected to score higher in both self-esteem and feelings of well-being than non-owners. Ninety-nine subjects, ranging in age from 18 to 65 yr. ( 17 male, 18 female nonowners; 33 male, 31 female pet-owners), completed the Well-being and Self-acceptance Scales of the California Psychological Inventory which the examiners scored using the keys. Analysis of the data compared adult owners and non-owners, female owners with female non-owners, male owners with male non-owners, and cat-owners with dog-owners. No significant differences were found between any two groups on the Self-acceptance Scale. On the Well-being Scale, a significant difference was found between male owners and male non-owners, the latter scoring significantly higher ($40 = 2.25, p < .05). This result can probably be accounted for by the fact that half of the male non-owners and only one-fourth of the male pet-owners were members of a multipurpose service club characterized by close humao/human bonds. These members tended to score higher on the Well-being Scale than did non-members (t40 = 1.47, p < . l o ) . When club members were removed and the t test re-run, the difference between male owners and male non-owners disappeared ( tn = 1.07). Results neither support the hypothesis nor agree with any previous studies, possibly because types of subjects differed in the present and previous studies. Present subjects were adults engaged in productive work, the majority being professionally employed or business owners or managers. The animal/human bond fills the needs for companion, friend, servant, scapegoat, team-mate, confidant, defender ( 4 ) , and, in productively employed, upper middle-class adults, these needs may already be satisfied by human/human bonds. Pet ownership would be less beneficial than it is to other groups and, in some cases, a liability, subtracting time and energy from human interactions. But this study does point to difficulty in generalizing about the animal/human bond and to a need for research into the variables which alter the value of and need for pet ownership.