The terms temperament, personality and behaviour are often used interchangeably in everyday conversation. However, they describe different aspects of an animal and understanding these distinctions is essential when selecting and assessing assistance animal prospects.

Temperament refers to an animal’s innate behavioural and emotional tendencies. It is strongly influenced by genetics and early neurological development and remains relatively stable throughout life. Temperament influences how an animal is likely to respond to novelty, stress, frustration, people and other animals. Characteristics such as confidence, sociability, emotional stability, resilience and sensitivity are commonly considered aspects of temperament.

Personality describes the unique combination of behavioural characteristics that develops as temperament interacts with life experiences, learning and the environment. Personality continues to develop throughout an animal’s life and contributes to the individual’s distinctive behavioural style. Two dogs with similar temperaments may develop noticeably different personalities depending on their experiences, training and socialisation.

Behaviour refers to the observable actions an animal performs in a particular situation. Behaviour is influenced by temperament, personality, health, motivation, learning history and the immediate environment. Unlike temperament, behaviour can change from one situation to another and can often be modified through training, environmental management or medical treatment.

For example, a dog that barks when approached by unfamiliar people is displaying a behaviour. That behaviour may result from fear, excitement, frustration, pain, previous learning or territorial motivation. Assessing the behaviour alone does not explain why it occurred. Understanding the underlying temperament and considering the context are essential before drawing conclusions about suitability for assistance work.

Understanding the difference between behaviour and its underlying cause is also important because humans naturally tend to anthropomorphise animals. Anthropomorphism is the attribution of human thoughts, emotions, intentions or motivations to non-human animals. While forming strong emotional bonds with assistance animals is entirely appropriate, interpreting behaviour through a human perspective can lead to inaccurate conclusions and poor welfare outcomes. For example, a dog that refuses to enter a building may be described as “stubborn”, “naughty” or “trying to get its own way”, when the behaviour may instead reflect fear, pain, uncertainty, confusion, sensory overload, fatigue or a previous negative experience. Similarly, a dog that appears “jealous” may instead be responding to learned reinforcement, resource guarding or changes in social interactions. Evidence-informed assistance animal practice requires professionals to interpret observable behaviour objectively by considering the animal’s health, temperament, learning history, environment and the function of the behaviour, rather than assuming human-like motivations. This approach supports more accurate assessments, protects animal welfare and promotes appropriate training and management decisions.

This distinction is particularly important during prospect selection. A single behavioural observation should never determine whether an animal is suitable or unsuitable. Instead, assessors consider patterns of behaviour across multiple environments and situations while also evaluating the animal’s temperament, health, developmental history and capacity to learn. Similarly, desirable behaviours such as sitting calmly or walking politely on lead do not necessarily indicate that an animal possesses the emotional stability, resilience or confidence required for long-term assistance work.

Practice Example

A trainer assessed two young dogs during an initial suitability assessment. Both barked when a metal trolley was accidentally dropped nearby. One dog startled briefly, investigated the source of the noise, recovered within seconds and willingly resumed working with its handler. The second dog remained fearful, avoided the area for the remainder of the assessment and became increasingly reluctant to engage with training. Although both dogs displayed the same initial behaviour of barking, their subsequent responses reflected important differences in temperament and emotional resilience. The assessment focused not on the startle itself, but on each dog’s ability to recover, adapt and continue working in a safe and confident manner.

Occupational Therapy Considerations

Occupational therapists should recognise that behaviour is only one component of an assistance animal assessment. Interpreting behaviour without considering temperament, personality, health, learning history and environmental context may lead to inaccurate conclusions regarding an animal’s suitability. Likewise, OTs should be mindful of anthropomorphism when discussing an animal’s behaviour with clients and families. Helping clients distinguish between observable behaviour and assumed emotions or intentions promotes realistic expectations, supports welfare-focused decision-making and strengthens interdisciplinary communication. Understanding these distinctions enables OTs to contribute more effectively to interdisciplinary discussions, interpret assessment findings appropriately and support evidence-informed decisions regarding animal selection, training and long-term placement.

Previous Topic

Back to Lesson

Next Topic