Increases in the number of owned brachycephalic dogs has drawn attention to concerns for their welfare. Given the wide range of well-known health issues that these breeds suffer from and related anatomical problems, numerous marketing campaigns have been launched aimed at reducing the attraction and ownership of brachycephalic breeds in the last ten years, but these appear to have failed in that the campaigns appear to have generated unexpected consequences, potentially with counter-productive effects, evidenced by the substantial increase in registrations of these types of dogs. We need a fresh approach. There may be barriers for owners that resist positive change. To date, we know little about the drivers behind the breeding and acquisition of these dogs and there is an urgent need to understand the phenomenon to tackle the related animal welfare crisis.

We compared owners’ attitudes, desires and experiences concerning dog ownership as well as their knowledge and perception of related welfare information in order to identify unique features of relevance related to brachycephalic ownership that may be used to inform future measures aimed at improving brachycephalic dog welfare.

Specifically, we aimed to: (1) identify the dissonance reduction strategies employed by brachycephalic dog owners related to the welfare of the breed, and (2) explore the reasons behind the failure of current welfare campaigns in reducing the attraction and ownership of brachycephalic breeds. To achieve the first aim, we had two objectives: Objective 1 to describe the ways in which current and potential brachycephalic breeds frame their beliefs and experiences of ownership related to the concerns about brachycephalic breeds; and, Objective 2 to identify and evaluate egoistic motivations related to ownership of a brachycephalic dog which may serve to reduce owner dissonance related to the welfare problems faced by these breeds. To achieve our second aim, we studied both the perspectives of the stakeholder experience, relative to that of ownership of other breeds as well as that of the organisations that hosted brachycephalic welfare campaigns. This enabled a holistic overview of campaign messaging and its potential impact.

A mixed method was employed to fulfil the above aim and objectives. Primarily, we adapted an explorative qualitative study, through semi-structured interviews with 11 brachycephalic dog owning participants in the UK. Thematic analyses identified a richness to how welfare concerns associated with these dogs were interpreted and rationalised and how the campaigns were interpreted. The findings from this qualitative study also served as a foundation for a quantitative survey.

Our survey identified significantly greater egoistic motivations related to dog ownership by brachycephalic dog owners and the significant expressions of active dissonance apparent amongst brachycephalic dog owners; we also found evidence of significant dissonance reduction strategies potentially used by brachycephalic dog owners.

Brachycephalic dog owners often adopt anthropocentric and egocentric attitudes towards these breeds, which may be exacerbated by an increased sensitivity to neotenic characteristics such as large, wide-set eyes and round faces, with ownership framed as a nurturing behaviour with a close bond, which has the potential to bias information processing. Such tendencies are problematic when it comes to communication in welfare issues as they tend to process educational information subjectively, using their own frames of reference supported and reinforced by the wider brachycephalic owner community rather than appreciating the welfare concerns of the animal. If the welfare campaigns’ objective focuses on welfare educational information delivery that counters their existing personal and community constructed belief systems, the brachycephalic owners’ personal projection of egoistic beliefs and tendencies could lead to their behaviours to go against the common good and act to pursue their own needs and support their actions. As a result, campaigns that focus on health-related information may be ineffective. Furthermore, brachycephalic owners could be self-discouraged from considering the campaign information through downplaying their perception of the individual dog’s heath issues; focusing instead on their ability to care and provide by positioning themselves as a “saviour” type character.

Our findings indicate that current and potential brachycephalic owners adopt dissonance reduction strategies to preserve the validity of their decision making and so safeguard their personal and social identities when confronted with campaign information that counters their own and the wider brachycephalic community belief systems.  By situating their dog as ‘other’, owners reject information that their dog is not healthy and so ignore the scientific literature or undertake reframing to provide alternative ‘evidence’ that such information as irrelevant and does not apply to their own dog.  They further undertake boundary work to draw lines of differentiation with other dog breed owners by reframing the information in line with an egocentric desire to be a ‘caregiver’, with some degree of acceptance of the health issues of these dogs, whilst believing they are most suitable to care for them.

Given the diversity of brachycephalic owning demographics, we do not believe these models apply to all owners, but they do appear to apply to a significant proportion within this demographic. Our findings appeared to suggest a significant segment group who are not put off by this sort of campaign material and who may be a population force driving the popularity of these dogs. The extrinsic characterisation of these owners indicates that they are influenced by social media.