Systematic review identifies inconsistencies in canine behavioral questionnaires, suggesting better measurement tools.
Whilst many questionnaires assessing canine behavior exist, characterizations of behavior are inconsistent. Therefore, this systematic review identified how existing canine behavioral questionnaires characterize dog behavior. Completed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, Study characteristics and eligible questionnaires were extracted for synthesis. Based on previous literature, a behavioral characterization framework was developed consisting of: Temperament, Emotion, Literal behavior related to composition, Literal behavior resulting from learning, Literal behavior – other, and Other. Thirty-eight studies reporting 37 questionnaires were included. Item coding revealed substantial variability in how canine behavior was operationalized, with emotion-based descriptors ranging from 2.3% − 40.5% across groups, and a high proportion of mixed or uncategorizable items (26.3% − 64.4%), indicating conflation of observable behavior with inferred traits or emotional states. This review highlights inconsistency in how canine behavior is defined and measured, with many existing questionnaires conflating observable behavior with inferred traits or emotions. The findings emphasize the need for a clearer conceptualization of “canine behaviour” and development of tools that capture literal, observable actions rather than human interpretation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: