| Sumario: | The human–animal bond plays a central role in how people interact with and evaluate animals, particularly companion animals such as dogs. Perceptions of a dog's sociability influence decisions regarding pet adoption, training, and behavior assessment. However, there is no single, clear definition of "sociability" in dogs, which complicates consistent evaluation. This study aimed to explore how people in Flanders (Belgium) define canine sociability and how they apply this concept, while recognizing that findings may reflect cultural characteristics of this region. An online survey was developed to explore public perceptions of canine sociability. Both laypeople and professionals first described what they consider a sociable dog to be, then rated the sociability of six dogs in photos, followed by seven dogs in short video clips. Finally, demographic data were collected, including gender, age group, dog ownership, dog-related professional experience, and frequency of contact with dogs. A total of 213 respondents were included in the final analysis. Open-ended responses on what defines a sociable dog yielded 701 response elements across 27 categories. The most frequently mentioned features involved emotions and behaviors suggesting intent (e.g., "initiating contact," "greeting"), while "type of person" (e.g., children, (un)familiar people) was more often highlighted by male respondents, and "context" (e.g., situation or environment) was particularly emphasized by those with a lot of contact with dogs. When participants judged dogs based on still images, perceived sociability was associated with factors such as breed, respondent gender, and prior contact with the breed. In contrast, when participants evaluated dogs based on short video clips, the perception was primarily associated with the specific video shown and the respondent's contact with dogs. Notably, professionals did not differ from laypeople in their description of sociability and their sociability score on the photos or the videos. While canine sociability may have heritable components, our findings indicate that its interpretation is strongly shaped by human perception, situational context, and observer background. This underscores the need for a shared, standardized method of assessment to support better dog selection, training, and welfare – and ultimately a stronger human–dog bond.
|
|---|