The available evidence seems to suggest that genetic change is really only a one-way street amongst the various quasi-symbiotic relationships that humankind has entered into with other animal species. Humans would appear not to have changed, other than in cultural innovation - the Inuit's dogsled or the flowering of Native American culture on the Great Plains that followed the introduction of the horse. Even the semi-wild reindeer has been changed, in temperament if not anatomy, by the Lapps who literally harness its potential.

The only exception I can think of is the possibility that cats - or rather their intestinal parasites - may have affected human brain activity.

The first diagnosed cases of schizophrenia in western societies occurred during the late nineteenth century, at the time when cats were first kept as house pets rather than as a semi-wild agent of pest control. It might well be pure coincidence, but the cat carries a parasitic worm that, when ingested by a mouse, for example, can turn off the part of the brain that gives the mouse a strong antipathy to the scent of a cat. With this mechanism, the parasite goes a long way to ensure that the mouse, now less afraid of its predator, is more likely to be caught and eaten, a process which inevitably allows the parasite to find itself once again in the feline gut, the every environment for which it has evolved.

It's tempting to think that the transformation from wild wolf to domesticated dog, and with it the change in physiology, took generations - in fact, research shows that it took place with the span of less than half a dozen generations of wolf. It seems that it took a relatively brief time for the wolves that began to visit hunter-gatherer settlements, and feed on human leavings, to become both domesticated and less wolf-like, even in appearance.

My half baked opinion is that neoteny is a fraught concept. An enthusiastic oversimplified attempt at describing developing maturity. I assume that you are taking about people participating with dogs and those who have not. Dogs and humans have co evolved for their mutual benefit. Driven by epigenetic change.This relationship is common throughout all kingdoms in life. Individual people's affinity with dogs, as with other animals, is most likely dependent on familiarity. That is individual experience.

No, but there have been studies that show that when nuclear families are nurturing and take care of the children, the children physically mature at a much slower rate than the general population, with prolonged childhoods.

Researchers theorize that when children are protected, it's safe for them to mature more slowly, gaining the advantage of more parental instruction, giving their own children more advantages.

However, if the the scent of strange adult male urine is present, and children are subjected to stress, as when there is sexual abuse in the home, girls mature much more quickly, presumably to give them a chance to procreate while still alive.