(Photo by Frank Flores in collaboration with Unsplash+)

In A Nutshell

Researchers tested 40 pet dogs to see if they could judge whether a human was generous or selfish, either by watching the person interact with another dog (eavesdropping) or through their own direct experience.

Dogs showed no consistent preference for generous people, regardless of age or testing condition. Only 3 out of 40 dogs showed statistically significant preferences, and one of them preferred the selfish person.

Despite common beliefs, dogs may not form moral-like judgments about people based on generosity. Instead, they likely respond more to immediate cues like food, tone of voice, or attention, rather than forming reputations.

Austrian researchers test 40 dogs and find surprising results about canine social intelligence

VIENNA — Ask any dog owner, and they’ll likely tell you their furry friend has an uncanny ability to judge human character. The family dog gravitates toward the nice neighbor but gives the grumpy mailman a wide berth. Surely dogs can tell the difference between generous and selfish people, right?

Not so fast. A study involving 40 pet dogs has delivered a surprising blow to this widely held belief. Researchers found that dogs, regardless of their age or experience, showed no meaningful preference for humans who were generous with food over those who were stingy. Even more striking, this held true whether dogs witnessed the human behavior firsthand or simply observed it happening to another dog.

How Scientists Tested Dogs’ Ability to Judge Human Character

Researchers from the University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna recruited 44 pet dogs ranging from 1 to 12 years old, though four dogs were ultimately excluded for lack of motivation to participate. The remaining 40 dogs were divided into different age groups: young (1-3 years), adult (4-7 years), and senior (8-12 years) to test whether experience with humans affects their ability to form opinions about people.

The experiment involved three distinct scenarios. In the “eavesdropping” condition, dogs watched two unfamiliar women interact with another dog. One woman consistently acted generous, offering food with a friendly tone while the other woman was deliberately selfish, speaking in an unfriendly tone and turning away with crossed arms. The control group watched the same human actions but without any dog present.

Most telling was the direct experience condition, where dogs themselves received generous or selfish treatment from the two women over 12 separate trials. If dogs were truly capable of forming opinions based on human behavior, this direct experience should have produced the strongest preference for the generous person.

Dogs are just as happy to see you even without a treat in hand, or if you appear standoffish, researchers say. (Photo by Brooke Cagle on Unsplash+) Study Results: Dogs Don’t Show Preference for Generous People

Despite giving dogs multiple opportunities to demonstrate preference for generous humans, the results were remarkably consistent: dogs simply didn’t care. Whether young puppies or senior dogs, whether observing from afar or experiencing treatment firsthand, the vast majority of dogs showed no meaningful preference for the generous person over the selfish one.

Out of 40 dogs in the direct experience condition, only three showed a statistically significant preference for one person over another. Two of these dogs preferred the generous person, but one actually preferred the selfish person — hardly the pattern expected if dogs were reliably judging human character.

The researchers also measured how much time dogs spent exhibiting friendly behaviors toward each person, such as approaching, looking at them, or staying near them. Again, the results, published in Animal Cognition, showed no systematic preference for generous humans across any age group or experimental condition.

Why Dogs May Not Judge Human Generosity

The research team offers several explanations for dogs’ apparent indifference to human generosity. Unlike their wolf ancestors, who must carefully navigate complex social hierarchies in the wild, domestic dogs have been bred for thousands of years to be generally friendly and trusting toward humans. This breeding may have reduced their need—or ability—to make fine distinctions between generous and selfish people.

Pet dogs also live in what researchers describe as stable, positive relationships with humans. Most pet dogs receive regular meals, affection, and care regardless of their behavior, which may make them less sensitive to variations in human generosity. The study notes that “persistence is likely to have been rewarded in pet dogs’ past experiences,” meaning that approaching any human often leads to positive outcomes.

Additionally, the experimental setup, involving unfamiliar women offering small pieces of sausage, may not have carried enough significance for well-fed pet dogs to form strong preferences. The stakes were simply too low to motivate careful social evaluation.

Rather than judging humans based on moral qualities like generosity or fairness, dogs likely respond more directly to immediate cues: Who has food? Who provides attention? Who represents safety or fun? This more straightforward approach to social relationships may actually serve dogs well in their domesticated environment, where most humans they encounter are generally friendly.

More than one-third of the dogs in the study showed significant biases toward particular locations or visual cues, revealing that seemingly intelligent behavior might often reflect much simpler decision-making processes.

You don’t have to splurge on those expensive bones to get your dog to love you after all. (Credit: © Natalia Skripnikova | Dreamstime.com) What Dog Owners Should (and Shouldn’t) Read Into This

The research doesn’t mean that dogs are incapable of learning about human behavior or that they can’t distinguish between different people. Dogs clearly form strong bonds with their owners and can learn to associate specific humans with positive or negative experiences. However, the study reveals that dogs may not engage in the kind of sophisticated social evaluation that many owners imagine.

Claims about dogs’ ability to “read” human character should be viewed with healthy skepticism. While dogs are undoubtedly skilled at reading human body language, facial expressions, and vocal tones, this research indicates they may not be forming the complex moral judgments that humans often attribute to them.

Despite decades of domestication and close partnership with humans, dogs appear to navigate their social world through fundamentally different mechanisms than their human companions. Rather than diminishing dogs’ remarkable abilities, this research simply reveals that canine intelligence may operate in ways that are more practical (and perhaps more pragmatic) than many owners realize.

Paper Summary Methodology

Researchers tested 40 pet dogs aged 1-12 years in three experimental conditions. In the eavesdropping condition, dogs observed two unfamiliar women interacting with another dog—one acting generous with food and one acting selfish. A control group watched the same human actions without a dog present. In the direct experience condition, dogs themselves received generous or selfish treatment from the two women over multiple trials. Researchers measured both which person dogs chose to approach and how much time they spent exhibiting friendly behaviors toward each person.

Results

Dogs showed no significant preference for generous humans over selfish ones in any condition. Only 3 out of 40 dogs demonstrated a statistically significant preference in the direct experience condition, with two preferring the generous person and one preferring the selfish person. Dogs across all age groups performed at chance levels, meaning their choices were essentially random. Time spent exhibiting affiliative behaviors also showed no systematic preference for generous humans.

Limitations

The study was conducted outdoors, which introduced environmental distractions and biases (37% of dogs showed location preferences). The experimental setup involved well-fed pet dogs and unfamiliar humans offering small food rewards, which may not have been significant enough to motivate reputation formation. The researchers note that methodological challenges in studying animal cognition make it difficult to definitively rule out reputation-forming abilities, and dogs might form reputations but fail to demonstrate them in experimental settings.

Funding and Disclosures

This research was funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS KAKENHI). The study was approved by the Ethics and Animal Welfare Committee of the University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna. The authors declared no competing interests.

Publication Information

Jim, H-L., Belfiore, K., Martinelli, E.B., Martínez, M., Range, F., & Marshall-Pescini, S. (2025). “Do dogs form reputations of humans? No effect of age after indirect and direct experience in a food-giving situation,” was published in Animal Cognition, on June 28, 2025. DOI: 10.1007/s10071-025-01967-w