Social media has transformed access to information about assistance animals. Prospective handlers can now watch training videos, read personal stories and connect with handlers from around the world within minutes. While this has many benefits, it has also led to the rapid spread of misinformation, oversimplified advice and unrealistic expectations.

Occupational therapists should be able to critically evaluate the quality of information presented online and help clients distinguish between evidence-informed practice, professional opinion, marketing and anecdote.

Not Everything Online Is Evidence

Many social media posts appear highly convincing because they feature successful assistance animal teams, dramatic transformations or emotionally engaging stories.

However, a video showing an assistance dog successfully completing a task does not demonstrate that:

the training method is effective
the method is safe
the approach is ethical
the technique is supported by research
the outcome can be generalised to other teams

Individual experiences can be valuable for understanding lived experience, but they should not be confused with scientific evidence.

Anecdotes Are Not the Same as Evidence

An anecdote is a personal story or individual experience.

For example:

“My rescue dog became an amazing assistance dog.”
“My Border Collie never tires.”
“My Cavoodle is completely hypoallergenic.”
“My dog learned this task in one day.”

These experiences may be completely genuine, but they describe what happened to one individual under a specific set of circumstances.

Evidence-based practice looks beyond individual success stories to determine whether similar outcomes are consistently achieved across many animals, handlers and environments.

Beware of Absolute Claims

Prospective handlers may encounter statements such as:

“This breed is guaranteed to succeed.”
“This training method works for every dog.”
“You don’t need a trainer.”
“Temperament testing predicts everything.”
“Any dog can become an assistance dog if trained properly.”
“Only our dogs can become real assistance dogs.”

Absolute statements are rarely supported by evidence.

Animal behaviour is complex, and no ethical professional can guarantee outcomes for an individual puppy or handler.

When evaluating information, claims that sound too good to be true often deserve closer scrutiny.

Marketing Is Not Independent Evidence

Breeders, trainers and organisations naturally promote their services. However, promotional material should not be confused with independent evidence.

Testimonials, before-and-after videos and graduation photographs demonstrate that successful outcomes can occur, but they do not provide information about:

how many animals entered the program
how many were career changed
selection criteria
long-term outcomes
welfare standards
independent evaluation

Critical appraisal requires looking beyond marketing to determine whether claims are supported by transparent evidence and ethical practice.

Consider the Source

When evaluating information, it is helpful to ask:

Who produced this information?
What qualifications or expertise do they have?
Is there evidence to support the claims?
Are alternative viewpoints acknowledged?
Is the information current?
Does the source have a commercial interest?
Are welfare and ethics discussed?

Reliable information often comes from multiple independent sources that reach similar conclusions rather than relying on a single influential individual.

Social Media Can Create Unrealistic Expectations

Social media often highlights exceptional moments rather than everyday reality.

Videos may show:

flawless public access
perfect task performance
rapid training progress
calm behaviour in difficult environments

What viewers rarely see are:

months or years of training
setbacks and behavioural challenges
career changes
veterinary treatment
ongoing reinforcement
the daily management required to maintain performance

This can create unrealistic expectations for prospective handlers, who may believe successful assistance animals require little effort or never experience difficulties.

Practice Example

WAFA was contacted by a prospective handler who wished to purchase a particular breed after watching numerous social media videos describing it as the “perfect assistance dog.” The handler believed the breed would naturally possess the skills required and questioned whether professional assessment was necessary. During consultation, WAFA explained that online videos typically showcase successful individuals rather than the many dogs that are unsuitable for assistance work or are career changed during training. By reviewing current evidence together, the handler came to understand that breed influences probability—not certainty—and that selecting an assistance animal should be based on independent assessment, occupational goals and evidence-informed practice rather than online popularity or marketing claims.

Occupational Therapy Considerations

Occupational therapists should support clients to become informed consumers of assistance animal information. Encouraging critical thinking helps clients distinguish between lived experience, professional opinion, marketing and scientific evidence while reducing the risk of unrealistic expectations or inappropriate decision-making.

Evidence-informed practice does not dismiss personal stories or social media experiences; rather, it places them alongside research evidence, clinical expertise, ethical principles and the client’s individual circumstances. Helping clients critically evaluate information supports better decision-making and contributes to safer, more effective and more ethical assistance animal partnerships.

Previous Topic

Back to Lesson

Next Topic