A new study finds that our bond with dogs mirrors that with children and best friends, offering affection, support, and trust with far less drama than our human connections.
Study: Similarities and differences between dog–human and human–human relationships. Image Credit: Julia Suhareva / Shutterstock
In a recent study published in the journal Scientific Reports, researchers evaluated whether dog-owner relationships can be characterized using the same multidimensional social support scales applied to human relationships.
Background
More than 65 million American households have dogs, yet our emotional relationship with them often defies simple labels. Many dog owners call their pets “family,” “best friend,” or even “fur baby.” But do these labels reflect the real emotional dynamics of the relationship? Traditional theories, such as attachment theory, view dogs as akin to children, emphasizing emotional dependence and care. Others suggest that dogs fulfill roles similar to those of romantic partners or close friends, offering comfort and companionship. However, these views lack systematic comparisons with human relationships. A rigorous, multidimensional framework of relationship dynamics is essential for accurately defining the dog-owner bond. Further research is needed to explore how life stages and social contexts alter these relational roles. The researchers also note that relying solely on self-applied labels, such as “family member” or “child,” may oversimplify the true complexity and diversity of dog-human bonds.
About the study
Researchers collected data from 717 dog owners across two periods: 2011–2013 and 2022–2023. Participants completed an adapted version of the Network of Relationships Inventory – Social Provision Version (NRI-SPV) that evaluated 13 relationship scales, such as Companionship, Nurturance, Intimacy, and Relative Power. Respondents rated their relationships with their favorite dog and four human partners: a child, a romantic partner, a best friend, and a closest kin. Questions were modified to suit dog-human interactions (e.g., replacing “this person” with “he/she”).
The study also gathered demographic data on owners and dogs, including age, gender, dog breed, and household composition. Only those currently owning at least one companion dog were eligible. Notably, the sample was predominantly female (over 90%) and self-selected, which may have biased the results toward more positive perceptions of dog-owner relationships. For reliability, the team assessed internal consistency using Cronbach’s alpha for both human and dog scales. They performed exploratory factor analysis to validate whether the same relationship structure applied to dogs. Statistical comparisons between dog-human and human-human relationship scales were conducted using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, measuring effect size by Cohen’s d. Spearman correlations were calculated to explore correlation patterns. Differences across groups, including age, parenthood, and dog age, were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test and Spearman’s rank-order correlation.
It is important to note that participants were asked to rate their “favorite” dog and their “closest” or “best” human relationships, rather than evaluating their entire social network or all pets. As the authors note, this focus may limit generalizability to broader social contexts. The study’s findings are based on subjective self-report, which may not always reflect real-life priorities or behaviors.
Study results
While participants generally rated their relationships with dogs more positively than with most human partners, ratings for children were similar to or higher than for dogs on several scales. Dogs scored significantly higher on Companionship and Nurturance than closest kin, romantic partners, and best friends. Support ratings were also higher for dogs, driven by stronger feelings of affection, nurturance, and reliable alliance. Owners reported fewer negative interactions, such as conflict or antagonism, with their dogs compared to human partners, except best friends. Dogs received higher satisfaction ratings than closest kin and best friends and were rated as having a more asymmetrical power balance, with owners clearly in charge.
Among all human partners, the relationship with children most closely resembles the dog-owner bond, particularly in terms of nurturance and emotional reassurance. However, the dog-human bond still showed a distinct pattern. Dogs seemed to combine the emotional warmth of a child with the low-conflict nature of close friendships. Notably, while romantic partners scored higher on Intimacy, dogs outperformed them on reliable alliance and affection.
Exploratory factor analysis confirmed that the same 13-scale structure could reliably assess dog-human relationships. The Support and Negative Interaction super-scales also aligned closely with human versions. For example, eight scales loaded onto Support and three onto Negative Interaction as expected, validating the framework's use across species.
Only minor differences appeared when comparing the merged dataset across both collection periods. Participants in the 2022–2023 study tended to rate their romantic partners more positively, while ratings for dogs and best friends were slightly lower. However, these shifts had small effect sizes and did not alter the overall findings.
Interestingly, the strength of the dog-human relationship was positively correlated with the strength of human relationships, especially those with children. This suggests that dogs may complement, not substitute, human emotional support. Factors such as parenthood influenced results: owners without children reported higher affection and companionship with their dogs. Dog age also played a role; puppies elicited more nurturance and a greater sense of power imbalance, while older dogs were perceived as more reliable companions. Similarly, younger and older owners (vs. middle-aged ones) expressed higher levels of support and lower conflict in their dog relationships. However, the majority of observed differences across demographic groups were small to moderate in effect size.
Conclusions
This study provides empirical evidence that dog-human relationships mirror human bonds in measurable, multidimensional ways. Dogs often fulfill roles similar to children and close friends, offering high companionship and nurturance with minimal conflict. These findings challenge simplistic labels such as “pet” or “family member” and underscore the complex role dogs play in human social networks. Importantly, the emotional quality of the dog-owner relationship tends to reflect, not replace, the quality of human relationships. The authors caution that the positive ratings for dogs may be influenced by social desirability bias, subjective comparisons, and a focus on the most valued individual relationships, suggesting that future research should employ more objective or aggregate measures to mitigate these biases. Researchers propose a novel, scalable approach to studying animal companionship by applying validated relationship frameworks.