1. Survey
The frequency of play was one of the strongest predictors of emotional closeness. Training on the otheer hand, did here only show a significant effect in combination with play, where owners that trained frequently in general also needed to play frequently to score higher on emotional closeness than owners that only trained frequently. However, owners that played several times per day did not need to train frequently to score high on emotional closeness. Even though both the frequency of play and training were found to have a significant effect on the MDORS sub scores Dog-owner interaction and Perceived cost, more significant differences in score were found within frequency of play than training. The result in regards to the three sub scores shows that play might have a stronger effect on the relationship than training.
It should also be mentioned that the frequency of training could be associated with type of training which might affect the result of both the emotional closeness and perceived cost score due to the caregiver burden that has been shown to affect owners of dogs with problem behaviours (Kuntz et.al., 2023). Owners that face challenges with their dog in their everyday life might be more inclined to train more frequently to solve the problem whereas others might train with lower frequency and focus on training that they enjoy rather than training out of necessity. This could potentially explain why several of the plots with the frequency of training look different from those of play.
The fact that owners that trained once per day or several times per day still showed high Emotional closeness score if they also played with their dog as frequently suggests that play might mitigate the negative effects of potential challenges within the relationship.
2. Treatment study.
For the treatment expriment only group belonging had any effect on any of the MDORS sub scores which shows that the differences seen in terms of emotional closeness did indeed stem from the increase in play alone. This shows that play indeed has a positive effect on the relationship, more so than training.
The results from theopen ended questions in the last survey did however show that both the Play and Training groups reported significant positive changes during the intervention period, whereas no such effects were observed in the Control group. This raises the question if it is meerely a placebo effect on the training groups part or that MDORS fails to capture some aspects in the relationship related to training.
While previous studies have emphasized the importance of shared activities such as play and training for strengthening the dog–owner relationship, the open-ended responses revealed distinct differences between the two intervention groups. Owners in the Play group highlighted increased dog-initiated play and greater attentiveness to canine signals, suggesting a relational enhancement through appreciation of the dog’s spontaneous initiatives. In contrast, the Training group attributed improvements primarily to training outcomes and performance, reflecting a relational dimension grounded in owner satisfaction with obedience and compliance.
Further, the Play group reported significantly higher levels of improved mood, play initiative, appreciation of play, and a more positive perception of the owner, potentially indicating enhanced canine welfare. These findings may be explained by physiological mechanisms such as dopamine release and reduced cortisol, as well as increased perceived control within the relationship. The Training group, while also noting positive changes, emphasized enjoyment of training, quality time, and rewards,
3. Video analysis
The fact that it only was the playgroup that stod out and that the behaviour was physical touch is interesting due to the fact that physical touch previously has been connected to higher levels of oxytocin, a hormone for social bonding (Chen et.al., 2020).
Conclusion
This study provides compelling evidence for the importance of play interactions in the dogowner relationship, highlighting its impact as greater than that of training. Even though training is an important aspect of our life with the dog, play seems to affect the relationship to an even greater degree especially for the aspect of emotional closeness.
This study also shows that there might be different dimensions of which play and training interactions affects the relationship, with play working in a more dog centric way and giving more clear benefits for the dog while the training works in a more human centric way where the relationship is
tied to satisfaction with training results and compliance of the dog.
The findings of this study are highly significant, both to improve our understanding of the crucial role of play within the dog-owner dyad and in offering practical insights for improving this relationship, and by doing so enhancing the welfare of both parties.