Does your dog chase things on TV? A 2025 study of 453 dogs found that canine viewing habits vary depending on what appears on screen, from animals and moving objects to non-animal stimuli, with temperament influencing some of their reactions

Does your dog suddenly start following something across the TV screen, barking at an animal or fixating on a moving object? That reaction may not be random. A new study suggests that how dogs engage with television may be linked to their temperament, with more excitable dogs more likely to follow objects on screen, while those with higher negative activation showed greater responses to non-animal stimuli.

The findings come from the study published in Scientific Reports on July 17, 2025. Led by Lane I. Montgomery, with Sarah Krichbaum and Jeffrey S. Katz, the researchers examined television-viewing behavior in companion dogs using a newly developed Dog Television Viewing Scale (DTVS).

The study analyzed responses from 453 dogs that were reported to watch television, looking at the kinds of images and sounds that attracted their attention and whether individual characteristics such as age, sex, breed group and temperament influenced their responses.

Excitement was linked to dogs following objects on screen

One of the clearest relationships emerged between a dog's level of excitement and its tendency to follow things on television. The researchers identified three major patterns in dogs' TV viewing: responses to animals, behavior involving following objects on screen, and responses to non-animal stimuli.

The “Follow” component accounted for 21.4% of the variation in the responses measured by the scale. Dogs with higher scores for excitement, a component of the researchers' Positive Activation measure, were more likely to score highly on the following behavior.

In practical terms, the finding suggests that a dog's general level of excitement may be related to how actively it tracks and chases things moving across a television screen.

Dogs also responded differently to animals and non-animal stimuli

The strongest overall pattern in the study was that dogs did not respond to every type of television content in the same way. The researchers' principal component analysis identified an Animal component that explained 24.5% of the variation, making it the largest of the three components.

A separate Non-Animal component accounted for 17.8%. Dogs generally showed moderate responses to animal-related stimuli, while responses to non-animal stimuli were more heavily concentrated at the lower end of the scale.

The distinction is important because it suggests that canine TV viewing is not simply a matter of whether a dog watches television or ignores it. The type of stimulus appearing on screen appears to matter.

Negative activation was associated with non-animal TV responses

Temperament also emerged in another part of the analysis. Dogs with higher levels of Negative Activation showed greater responses on the Non-Animal component.

The researchers therefore found that different aspects of temperament were associated with different types of television engagement. While excitement was associated with the following behavior, negative activation was associated with responses to non-animal stimuli.

Age, sex and breed group did not explain the main differences

Several characteristics that might intuitively be expected to influence television viewing did not show significant effects in the study. The researchers found no significant effects of age, sex or breed group on the three main TV-viewing components. Impulsivity also did not emerge as a significant predictor.

The study included dogs ranging from 4 months to 16 years old, with an average age of about 4.27 years. The researchers also examined whether prior television exposure affected the dogs' responses, but it did not significantly predict the main viewing components.

Dogs appeared particularly interested in animal content

The findings indicate that animal-related material was especially relevant to canine viewers. The Animal component included responses to dogs, other pets and other animals appearing on television. Longer periods of attention were associated with higher Animal scores.

The same relationship between viewing duration and response was also found for the Non-Animal component.

However, the researchers cautioned against treating these findings as evidence that dogs necessarily understand television images in the same way humans do.

Instead, the results provide evidence that dogs respond differently to different kinds of visual and auditory information presented through television.

What dogs see on TV may resemble their everyday visual world

The researchers also considered what these responses could mean for canine perception. The findings are consistent with the possibility that dogs may represent objects presented on a two-dimensional television screen in ways that resemble how they encounter objects in the three-dimensional world. But the study did not directly test whether dogs recognize television images as representations of real-world objects.

The findings could eventually matter for dog enrichment

Understanding which television stimuli attract dogs could have practical applications. The researchers suggest that the DTVS could provide a foundation for studying television as a potential enrichment for companion dogs and other animals in settings such as shelters.

Different dogs may respond differently to different kinds of content, meaning that a single type of programming may not be equally engaging for every animal.

At the same time, television could potentially produce unwanted arousal or stress in some dogs, making temperament an important consideration when studying its welfare applications.