The best way to begin something new—in love, work, and life.
Self Tests are all about you. Are you outgoing or introverted? Are you a narcissist? Does perfectionism hold you back? Find out the answers to these questions and more with Psychology Today.
Posted June 25, 2025 Reviewed by Davia Sills
I’ve written elsewhere about the many problems associated with breeding dogs for extreme physical features—most notably in my Aeon article, where I explore how selecting for cuteness and anthropomorphic traits often amounts to a form of cruelty. In that piece, I speculated, along with others, that one overlooked consequence of these extreme features—particularly the flattened faces of brachycephalic dogs—might be a reduced ability to communicate effectively with other dogs. I also discussed this idea in A Dog’s World, a book I co-authored with Marc Bekoff.
The assumption seems reasonable: If a dog’s face is so altered that it can’t produce the full range of facial expressions typical of its species, wouldn’t that impair communication? Wouldn’t that lead to more misunderstandings, potentially more social friction, and perhaps even more aggression?
But science has a way of humbling us. It appears I may have been wrong, or at least partially wrong, about the idea that brachycephalic dogs struggle to communicate with their own kind.
Features of brachycephalic dogs that have been thought to impair communication primarily relate to their unique facial morphology. Selective breeding for the wide, flattened facial features of some modern brachycephalic breeds has caused various skeletal changes: compressed nasal and pharyngeal airways, narrowed nostrils, thickened soft palates, and shortened pharyngeal cavities. The result is a hot mess in terms of health and well-being because these facial features obstruct airflow, causing severe, lifelong respiratory distress.
In terms of communication with other dogs (and also with people), the facial structure of short-nosed breeds is hypothesized to impair communication in a variety of ways. For example, the broad skull structure—the wide-set eyes and flat face—reduces the range of facial expressions, such as eyebrow movements or wrinkling, which are important for conveying emotions and intentions. The short muzzle and folded lip tissues hinder deliberate facial gestures—like wrinkling the forehead or lip-pulling—that are essential for threat displays or social signaling. The compressed nasal and pharyngeal structures, because they cause airflow issues and physical constraints, may further restrict expressive movements, especially those involving the face. Overall, these features can reduce the clarity and effectiveness of facial signals, potentially complicating intraspecific communication in brachycephalic dogs.
A recent study published in Applied Animal Behaviour Science, titled “Do Looks Matter? Investigating Facial Expressions and Intraspecific Communication Across Different Dog Morphotypes” by Chiara Canori and colleagues, suggests that flat-faced dogs might not be as disadvantaged in this area as I had thought. The researchers looked at whether dogs with different head shapes—brachycephalic (short-nosed and wide face, such as pugs and boxers ), mesocephalic (medium-sized muzzles, intermediate features, such as retrievers, pointers, shepherds), and dolichocephalic (long, narrow muzzles, such as greyhounds and collies)—differed in their ability to produce and respond to facial expressions in interactions with other dogs.
The team used the DogFACS (Dog Facial Action Coding System), a sophisticated method for objectively measuring facial movements, to compare expressions and behaviors across these different morphotypes. They found that while brachycephalic dogs do indeed have some physical limitations in their ability to perform certain facial movements, these dogs still seemed to communicate effectively with others in the study. Interestingly, brachycephalic dogs were not less expressive overall. In some cases, they even appeared to engage in more intense and prolonged social interactions.
Does this mean the flattened faces aren’t a problem for dog-to-dog communication? Maybe. But before we rush to revise our thinking, it’s important to recognize the limitations of this study.
For one thing, the sample size was small. The study only included 30 dogs, making it hard to generalize these findings across the full diversity of dog breeds and individual variation. Additionally, the social interactions were highly controlled and staged, which may not reflect how these dogs naturally communicate in less structured, everyday settings. Social communication is complex, fluid, and deeply contextual. A brief interaction in an experimental setup might tell us something, but it can’t capture the full richness of canine social life.
So, while this study provides an intriguing data point, it doesn’t fully answer the question of whether brachycephalic dogs experience significant social communication deficits. It does, however, invite us to think more carefully and perhaps more generously about these dogs and their abilities.
Even if it turns out that brachycephalic dogs can communicate just fine, I would argue this doesn’t change the deeper ethical issues. The primary concern with breeding for extreme physical features isn’t whether the dogs can navigate social cues—it’s that these features often cause profound health problems, chronic discomfort, and tragically shortened lifespans.
Brachycephalic dogs, like bulldogs, pugs, and French bulldogs, are prone to a range of serious issues: brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome (BOAS), eye injuries due to shallow sockets, dental overcrowding, spinal deformities, and difficulties with thermoregulation, among others. Their shortened snouts aren’t just an aesthetic variation—they are, in many cases, a lifelong disability.
So, even if these dogs can manage a “normal” social life, we still have to confront the fact that we have bred them into bodies that compromise their well-being. We’ve made choices that prioritize human preferences over canine health and longevity.
That’s the ethical heart of the matter.
It’s worth noting that even the researchers of this study, while neutral in tone, acknowledge that their findings don’t diminish the welfare concerns associated with brachycephalic breeds. The communication question is interesting—important, even—but it’s a secondary concern when set against the backdrop of chronic health suffering.
I appreciate that this study challenges some of my earlier assumptions. It’s a reminder to stay open to new evidence and to resist the pull of confirmation bias. Still, the broader ethical position remains unchanged: Breeding for extreme traits that jeopardize animal welfare is unacceptable, regardless of whether these animals can still “talk” to their peers.
In the end, this study doesn’t let us off the hook.
It’s tempting to look for ways to justify our attachment to these breeds. It’s tempting to think that if they can communicate and if they seem happy, maybe it’s all OK. But the reality is that we’ve set them up for suffering. That should be enough to make us pause.
So, yes—this is an interesting study. It challenges, it complicates, and it refines our thinking. But it doesn’t absolve us of the responsibility to rethink what we breed for and why.
We owe dogs better.
References
Canori, C., Biffi, E., Gaggia, L., Iuliano, B., & Valsecchi, P. (2025). Do looks matter? Investigating facial expressions and intraspecific communication across different dog morphotypes. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 106720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2025.106720
Share this post
There was a problem adding your email address. Please try again.
By submitting your information you agree to the Psychology Today Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy
Jessica Pierce, Ph.D., is a bioethicist and writer. She is an Affiliate Faculty with the Center for Bioethics and Humanities, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Center.
Get the help you need from a therapist near you–a FREE service from Psychology Today.
Psychology Today © 2026 Sussex Publishers, LLC
The best way to begin something new—in love, work, and life.
Self Tests are all about you. Are you outgoing or introverted? Are you a narcissist? Does perfectionism hold you back? Find out the answers to these questions and more with Psychology Today.