Researchers from the University of Helsinki, the University of Turku, and the Lapland University of Applied Sciences undertook a large-scale comparison of canine intelligence across more than one thousand dogs spanning thirteen distinct breeds. The study aimed to map how different breeds handle mental tasks and how these abilities relate to real world behavior. The findings were published in Scientific Reports, a peer reviewed journal that emphasizes rigorous methodological scrutiny and transparent reporting of results.
To gauge cognitive ability, the team employed the smartDOG battery of cognitive assessments. These tests probed several dimensions of intelligence, including spatial problem solving, logical reasoning, impulse control, and the capacity to read and interpret human cues. A notable portion of the evaluation tracked how dogs would seek assistance from their caregiver when confronted with an unsolvable challenge, offering insight into social communication and cooperative behavior within a familiar human context. The design allowed researchers to observe not only raw problem solving but also the strategic choices dogs make when a task appears beyond their immediate reach.
The researchers restricted the participant pool to dogs aged from one to eight years. This range was selected because cognitive development in younger dogs remains in progress and aging can introduce declines in certain mental processes. Data collection occurred over a span of years, from March 2016 through February 2022, ensuring a robust sample size. Each breed group contributed at least forty individual dogs to the dataset, providing a solid basis for statistical comparison and reducing the influence of outliers on breed level conclusions.
Across the board, the study revealed meaningful differences among breeds in social cognition, persistence in problem solving, behavioral control, and spatial reasoning tasks. These breed-level distinctions suggest that certain lines may have been shaped through historical roles that prioritized particular cognitive strengths. Yet the analysis found no consistent differences between breeds when it came to short term memory or abstract logical reasoning, indicating that these cognitive domains may be less influenced by breed lineage and more shaped by individual experiences, learning, and environment.
Among the breeds represented, Belgian Shepherd Malinois, Border Collies, and Hovawarts consistently emerged as standout performers in several assessed domains. Their strengths tended to cluster around cooperative communication with humans, sustained attention during challenging tasks, and adept handling of spatial puzzles that require planning and foresight. While these results highlight notable capabilities within these breeds, they also underscore the complexity of drawing broad conclusions from breed labels alone, since each breed group encompasses a wide range of individual temperaments and histories.
Some breed level differences proved less readily explained by the roles commonly associated with each breed. For instance, the Golden Retriever showed a marked divergence from the Labrador in performance on gesture recognition and grasping socially mediated cues during an unsolvable task, despite both dogs belonging to the Retriever family. The researchers emphasize the importance of evaluating cognitive traits at the level of individual breeds rather than relying solely on generalized group classifications. This nuance helps prevent overgeneralization and supports more precise interpretations of how dogs think and learn across diverse genetic and experiential backgrounds.