The Ideal Dog: A Dog Who Does Not Get in the Way?

When we ask people about their ideal dog, the answers usually sound very reasonable.

The dog should be healthy. Safe with children. Non-aggressive. Affectionate. Housetrained. Non-destructive when left alone. Not prone to escaping. Ideally medium-sized, with a short, low-shedding or non-shedding coat. It would also be good if the dog were a puppy and came from a shelter or rescue organisation.

This is exactly how the ideal dog was described in an Australian study from 2024, involving 337 adults. The researchers examined which physical, behavioural, and practical traits people considered desirable in a companion dog. Interestingly, the results were very similar to those of an earlier Australian study conducted over a decade ago. Despite the pandemic, social media, and major lifestyle changes, the image of the “ideal dog” turned out to be surprisingly stable.

At first glance, there is nothing strange about this. Who would not want a dog who is healthy, safe, affectionate, and easy to live with?

And yet beneath this image lies a more interesting question: when we describe the ideal dog, are we talking about a good relationship with a dog — or about a dog who disrupts our life as little as possible?

A dog who gives a lot and asks for little

The highest-rated traits of the ideal dog were very practical. Participants especially valued a dog who does not destroy things when left alone, is physically healthy, housetrained, does not escape from the property, and is safe with children. In the factor analysis, the highest-rated dimensions were “affectionate and healthy” and “non-aggressive and safe”. By contrast, “energy and drive” — energy, drive, a need for intense activity, hunting, or protective behaviour — were rated as much less important.

This says quite a lot about the contemporary image of the family dog.

The ideal dog is expected to be close to humans, but not too demanding. Affectionate, but not inconveniently dependent. Calm, but not boring. Healthy, but not too costly. Low-shedding, but not requiring much grooming. A dog — but one who fits neatly into the human daily schedule.

This does not mean these expectations are wrong. Many of them are completely understandable. A dog who is aggressive, ill, constantly escaping, destroying the home, or unable to cope with being alone can be a huge challenge both for the guardian and for the dog himself.

The problem begins when the list of expectations we have for the dog does not meet the question of what this dog will need from us.

A shelter puppy - a beautiful idea and a difficult reality

Participants most often imagined the ideal dog as a puppy from a shelter or rescue organisation. This sounds beautiful: a young dog, the possibility of building a bond from the beginning, and adoption instead of purchase.

But reality is more complex.

In the study, 58% of participants said they would prefer to acquire their ideal dog from a shelter or rescue. Yet among the dogs actually owned by respondents, only 19% had come from such a source. Many more had been bought from breeders or obtained from family and friends.

This does not necessarily mean hypocrisy. It is more likely to show a gap between the value people declare and the real conditions under which they choose a dog.

Adoption works well as an idea: ethical, socially acceptable, emotionally appealing. But when a person starts looking for a specific dog, additional expectations appear: a puppy, predictability, a particular appearance, low shedding, ease of training, safety with children. Such a dog is not always available in a shelter. Adult dogs, dogs with difficult histories, or dogs with a less “ideal” appearance often lose out to the image of a dog who can be “shaped from the beginning”.

In the study, people who preferred a puppy mainly pointed to the possibility of forming a stronger bond, the puppy’s “cuteness”, easier training, and having more time with the dog. Those who preferred an adult dog valued the fact that the dog already had basic training, allowed them to avoid the puppy stage, and had a more visible personality.

This is an interesting point. A puppy offers the promise of influence. An adult dog offers more information about who he already is. And yet the puppy more often fits the human fantasy of a bond built “from the beginning”.

A stable fantasy in a changing world

The researchers expected that the pandemic and social media might have changed the image of the ideal dog. In part, this made sense. The pandemic changed daily rhythms, remote work, loneliness, and the way people spent time at home. Social media strengthened the popularity of “Instagram dogs”: attractive, photogenic, often small, fluffy, “hypoallergenic”, or looking like living toys.

And yet the basic preferences remained similar to those from over a decade ago. People still want a medium-sized, healthy, affectionate, calm, safe, and low-problem dog.

This matters because it shows that the fantasy of the ideal dog is not simply the effect of TikTok, lockdown, or a temporary trend. It is deeper. It concerns the role the dog is expected to play in human life.

The dog is meant to be a companion, a source of closeness, and a member of the family. But at the same time, he should not introduce too much unpredictability. He should not complicate work, home life, relationships with children, walks, cleanliness, budget, or plans too much.

In other words: the dog should be present, but manageable.

A family dog, or a dog fitted into the system?

The findings can be read very simply: people want dogs who are safe, healthy, and friendly. And that is true. But we can also see something more: the modern companion dog is expected to function within a fairly narrow space of human expectations. He should offer emotional closeness without generating too much work. He should be an individual, but not too much of one. Alive, but predictable. Having needs, but preferably needs that fit into the human schedule.

This tension is especially visible with working, hunting, herding, and high-arousal dogs. People often choose them for their appearance, intelligence, image, or the belief that they will be a “great family dog”. Meanwhile, energy, drive, the need for movement, sniffing, work, or emotional regulation do not disappear simply because the dog now lives in an apartment and is expected to be a pleasant companion.

In the study, “energy and drive” was the relatively least valued dimension of the ideal dog. And yet for many real dogs, energy, excitability, curiosity, prey drive, the need to explore, or reactivity to movement are very important parts of how they function.

If we choose a dog whose natural traits do not fit our life, the problem later is not necessarily that the dog “fails to meet expectations”. The problem may be that the expectations never met reality in the first place.

The ideal dog does not exist

This is not about giving up expectations. A guardian has the right to want a dog they can live with safely. They have the right to think about children, costs, time, coat care, health, walks, and whether they are able to care for a particular animal.

But alongside the question “what kind of dog will be good for me?”, another question has to appear: for what kind of dog will my life be good?

This question is less comfortable, but much more honest.

Because the ideal dog does not exist. There is a dog whose temperament, needs, history, health, and way of regulating emotions may fit more or less well with the life of a particular human. And there is a human whose lifestyle, resources, knowledge, and willingness to change may fit more or less well with a particular dog.

A good relationship does not begin with finding a dog who does not get in the way.

It begins with seeing that the dog will have his own needs, his own limitations, and his own way of being in the world. And then asking honestly whether we really want to make room for him — not only in our home, but also in our daily schedule, patience, and idea of shared life.

Often, “the ideal dog” means: a dog who does not get in the way of our plan.

But the dog has a plan too.

---

Power, E. S., Dawson, J., & Bennett, P. C. (2024). The Ideal Canine Companion: Re-Exploring Australian Perspectives on Ideal Characteristics for Companion Dogs. Animals, 14(24), 3627. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14243627