Animal-assisted intervention for autism spectrum disorder: a systematic literature review.

Emerson (2013) looked at every paper that used animals to help kids with autism. They found 14 studies and asked: Do these programs really help?

The team read each paper and wrote down what got better—talking, playing, or problem behavior.

All 14 studies said the animal visits helped. Kids talked more, played more, or had fewer meltdowns.

But most studies were tiny and skipped things like random assignment, so the proof is still shaky.

McDaniel Peters et al. (2017) updated the story. They kept only horse programs but covered 33 studies—more than double. Their map says the same thing: kids improve, yet every farm does the lessons differently.

Meera et al. (2024) zoomed in on body skills. Their 12 studies show riding boosts balance and strength. This adds a new domain the 2013 review barely touched.

Ghai et al. (2022) asked real ABA clinicians. One in five already bring dogs into sessions. They like the idea but warn about bites, allergies, and animal stress—risks the 2013 paper did not cover.

Animals can be a fun way to spark client interest, but do not trade away your proven ABA procedures yet. Use them as brief reinforcers while you collect simple data: correct responses per minute with and without the dog present. Share the sheet with your supervisor so the team decides, not the tail wag.