Why humans struggle to read their dogs' emotions

Emotions guide human judgment in countless subtle ways. A cheerful mind notices joy in surrounding faces, while a gloomy mind detects sorrow. Yet once humans observe dogs, common patterns fall apart.

Fresh research shows how emotional signals from dogs meet a very different perceptual system, one shaped by mood in ways that are far from simple.

Work from Arizona State University reveals a puzzle at the crossroads of cognitive science and animal welfare. The findings point toward unseen biases that may alter care decisions for companion animals.

Such insights matter because misread cues can shape comfort, stress, and safety for dogs who share human spaces.

Mood skews dog emotions

Humans rely on cues from faces, posture, context, and prior experience to judge emotional states in others. Mood often steers those judgments.

Studies in human psychology show congruence effects, where a positive mind sees more positivity and a negative mind sees more negativity. Emotional state also alters recognition accuracy, memory, and reasoning.

Yet dog-focused experiments challenge these rules. Work on mood induction using validated human-centered images succeeded in shifting participant mood but produced no change in dog emotion ratings. Valence and arousal judgments barely moved.

The findings suggest a complex, multi-step, cross-species judgment system where standard psychological models hold limited power.

“In this domain of how people understand dogs’ emotions, I’m continuously surprised,” said study co-author Clive Wynne, a professor of psychology at Arizona State University. “I feel like we are just scratching at the surface of what is turning out to be quite a big mystery.”

Dogs alter our judgment

A second experiment explored a new idea: emotional cues from dogs might act differently from cues based on human images.

Dog-centered primes altered participant mood and also changed emotion judgments of dog videos.

Yet the direction ran opposite to human-based predictions. Positive primes led to more negative ratings. Negative primes led to more positive ratings.

Such contrast effects have surfaced in some human studies but rarely appear under clear conditions. Cross-species perception adds another layer. Emotional information from dogs may trigger comparison processes unlike those produced by human faces or scenes.

The findings suggest an internal reference system where one emotional signal sets the stage for an opposite reading of later signals.

“All those that saw the happy dog images rated the dogs as more sad, and all those who saw the sad dog images rated the dogs in the videos as happier,” said study co-author and researcher Holly Molinaro.

Why humans misread dogs

Research on perception of dog emotion points toward wide influences. Familiarity with dogs, cultural background, experience level, attachment, and situational cues all shape judgments.

Accuracy varies by age and context. Misinterpretations may arise from quick assumptions such as a wagging tail always showing joy or a still posture always showing fear.

The PeerJ study adds evidence that emotional interpretation involves more than immediate cues. Internal mood states, even short-lived ones, may combine with memory, expectations, and species-specific knowledge.

When mood flips judgment

Contrast effects seen in dog priming suggest an evaluative process influenced by difference rather than similarity.

Mood may not pull judgments in parallel with internal feeling – but push them in an opposite direction under some cross-species conditions.

Videos shown on a neutral black screen also raised participant mood across conditions. Positive, neutral, and even negative dog reactions lifted emotional state.

Work on stress reduction supports this pattern, with dog contact or observation often improving subjective well-being.

Mood’s impact on dog welfare

“People and dogs have been living intimately with each other for at least 14,000 years,” Wynne said. Yet frequent contact does not guarantee correct emotional reading.

Human minds may skip over important signals or reshape them unconsciously. Errors may influence handling, training, welfare practices, and choices surrounding medical or behavioral support.

Research indicates a need for clearer frameworks for reading dog cues. Emotional interpretation must account for mood-based distortions, contrast effects, and contextual influences beyond visible behavior.

The findings also point toward better training resources for humane care settings, veterinary environments, and adoption centers where accurate judgments support safer outcomes.

Future research directions

Experimental gaps highlight promising routes forward. Research could compare mood effects from primes involving other domestic species or wild animals.

More varied dog stimuli could test whether contrast effects persist across breeds and emotional intensities.

Work on non-animal primes, such as robots or animated figures, may clarify which features trigger cross-species rules. Mixed-method approaches may help, as free-response descriptions sometimes differ from numerical ratings.

Insights from trans-species emotion research open doors to improved human animal interaction. Emotional cues from dogs influence human mood, and human mood shapes judgments in return.

Understanding these two directions offers a path toward more compassionate and informed care for companion animals.

The study is published in the journal PeerJ.

—–

Like what you read? Subscribe to our newsletter for engaging articles, exclusive content, and the latest updates.

Check us out on EarthSnap, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

—–