In response to Hernandez et al.’s (Reference Hernandez, Melson-Silimon and Zickar2025) proposal that the I-O psychology lens be extended to nonhuman working animals, we propose an expansion of how a focus on the human–animal dyad can be informative to our field. Our viewpoint reflects the benefits of researching interactions between nonhuman working animals and their human handlers (i.e., supervisors), as the job performance of some human employees is dependent on these interspecies collaborations. Specifically, we use an I-O lens to examine research from other fields on emotional contagion between humans and animals that we believe can shed light on interdependence at work, shared emotions, and links to teamwork (cf. Hunt et al., Reference Hunt, Otto, James and Alvarez2012). We focus on search and rescue (SAR) dogs and how they cooperate with their teammates and handlers. SAR dogs are deployed in highly stressful and dangerous situations, often searching for injured humans and survivors after a natural disaster (e.g., earthquakes, fires) or an incident of terrorism (e.g., 9/11). They are certified working animals who are typically bonded to one human handler. Although it represents a change in the typical population of study for I-O psychologists, we argue that studying nonhuman animals may help us better understand work group dynamics. Nonhuman animals’ emotions and behaviors can impact the work-related behaviors of those humans whose performance is contingent on their partnership.
More specifically, research on working canines (e.g., police dogs, SAR dogs) provides a high-fidelity simulation of the employee–supervisor relationship that is a mainstay of I-O research. Trust between the two parties is critical in the dangerous contexts in which many of these pairs interact. This parallels the trust between supervisors and employees in similar organizational settings. For instance, law enforcement officers must trust a police dog as they would their human partners to continue working safely and effectively even when they are out of sight in a hazardous location. The pair must work together with a high level of synchrony, and handlers must be acutely aware of how they communicate both emotion and information to a SAR dog to avoid distracting them during intensive tasks (Kasprzak & Bornemark, Reference Kasprzak and Bornemark2024). Both working partners take cues from one another and build trust largely on the quality of these interactions, just as human coworkers would. However, each partner also brings unique skills to the work setting. In the case of SAR work, the trained canine will often track a scent and then follow directions via the human handler’s verbal and nonverbal signals. Together, the pair engage in a truly symbiotic work relationship as neither one alone possesses the other’s capabilities to help them reach their shared goal of a successful work outcome (i.e., rescue). The human handler may not be able to fit into small spaces during a search and cannot track a missing person’s scent, and the SAR dog may not foresee hazardous situations anticipated by the handler. This differs from I-O research that is focused mainly on human employee–supervisor relationships where the individuals have interchangeable, or potentially trainable, skills. Studying SAR dog-handler interactions can provide us with unique information about communication, emotional contagion, and links to performance and stress in a setting where each partner’s skills are truly distinctive yet complementary. This type of research would correspond to the “social exchange” component of Hernandez et al.’s (Reference Hernandez, Melson-Silimon and Zickar2025; Table 2) mapping of work domains to I-O research.
Emotional contagion and teamwork in nonhuman animal work groups
Working nonhuman animals interact with teammates and human handlers, are susceptible to stressors and emotional contagion (Albuquerque & Resende, Reference Albuquerque and Resende2023), and can develop resilience (Hare et al., Reference Hare, Kelsey, Niedermeyer and Otto2021). The processes of nonhuman animals taking cues from others and experiencing emotional contagion are akin to what occurs within dyadic relationships and work groups in organizations. The perception-action model suggests that observing another’s emotional state activates a corresponding representation in the observer, leading to shared emotional states, even across species (Preston & de Waal, Reference Preston and de Waal2002). I-O research on emotional contagion has focused on the transfer of emotions from one person to another (Barsade et al., Reference Barsade, Coutifaris and Pillemer2018), but the process has also been observed in canines, among other species (Perez-Manrique & Gomila, Reference Pérez-Manrique and Gomila2022).
In both humans and dogs, emotional contagion serves several functions, including warning others about potential threats and promoting social bonds. Dogs who have lived together for at least 1 year show higher alertness and more stress-related behavior when exposed to a familiar dog’s whine than a strange dog’s whine (Quervel-Chaumette et al., Reference Quervel-Chaumette, Faerber, Faragó, Marshall-Pescini and Range2016). Regarding emotional contagion between nonhuman working animals and their human handlers, several studies have focused on links between the attitudinal and behavioral reactions of SAR dogs during and after a deployment and their handlers’ emotions.
During a rescue, the working dyad of handler and SAR dog has been described as a collaboration where both parties must contribute their own distinct skills toward a commonly shared goal (Kasprzak & Bornemark, Reference Kasprzak and Bornemark2024). The handler, as supervisor, begins the collaboration by signaling when it is time to work (e.g., putting a vest on the dog) and providing directions during the task (e.g., hand signals, redirection away from danger). In turn, the SAR dog communicates while on-task, using multiple modalities such as tail movement, position of the head during scenting or tracking, and circling. During the search, dogs also look for feedback from their handler, which can include subtle information such as eye contact, the direction of the handler’s glances, or changes in the handler’s breathing (e.g., holding their breath in anticipation; Kasprzak & Bornemark, Reference Kasprzak and Bornemark2024). Such evidence of synchrony demonstrates remarkable levels of trust and familiarity with each partner’s communication style and nonverbal behaviors. In one study of police dogs, when handlers showed signs of stress, the dogs appeared to engage in problem solving by shifting to a reliance on their own olfactory senses rather than cues from their human partners (Zubedat et al., Reference Zubedat, Aga-Mizrachi and Cymerblit-Sabba2014).
Post rescue, SAR dogs often demonstrate physical fatigue and behavioral changes after finishing their demanding work, like employees showing signs of strain (e.g., gastrointestinal distress, skin lesions). Hunt et al. (Reference Hunt, Otto, James and Alvarez2012) studied SAR dogs and handlers who worked the 9/11 sites and found a positive correlation between PTSD symptoms and depression in handlers and dogs’ increased separation anxiety, excitability, and aggression toward other dogs. Dogs also had significantly more reactive cardiac responses depending on the valence of the emotions displayed by their human handlers (D’Aniello et al., Reference D’Aniello, Semin, Alterisio, Aria and Scandurra2018). These researchers also linked time and experience working together as a dyad with success in terms of both rescues and shorter recovery times from stressful searches, as reflected by the pairs’ lowered cortisol levels.
Implications for I-O psychology and future directions
A better understanding of the human employee–nonhuman animal work dyad can inform I-O psychology research on emotional contagion and team processes. Humans working with animal partners in high-stress situations are often in emotionally charged environments, particularly in cases following a disaster. Prolonged absorption of negative emotional states from or by nonhuman working animals could lead to adverse outcomes such as workplace injuries (cf. Pettita et al., Reference Pettita, Probst, Ghezzi and Barbaranelli2021) or unsuccessful searches (i.e., poor work performance). We also note that little is known regarding the importance of identifying job-relevant versus job-irrelevant negative emotional triggers among nonhuman working animals. For example, a SAR dog might display signs of distress at the smell of a gas leak or the sound of thunder. Would emotional contagion still occur when a trigger is interpreted as nonthreatening by the handler?
Positive emotion, calmness, and stability passed from human handlers to SAR dogs are linked to calmness in working animals’ responses, providing a dyadic model that can be useful in stress management training in the I-O field. This may also inform emotional labor research, as handlers who work closely with more emotionally expressive animals may experience greater mood shifts and cardiovascular reactivity (Katayama et al., Reference Katayama, Kubo, Yamakawa, Fujiwara, Nomoto, Ikeda, Mogi, Nagasawa and Kikusui2019). Handlers supervising these types of SAR dogs may engage in more frequent emotional labor to demonstrate neutral expressions or calmness when victims or their family members are nearby.
Beyond the SAR context, we also see opportunities for expanded I-O research on humans whose jobs require continuous interactions with multiple animals from different species (e.g., animal trainers, zookeepers), as such work creates complexity related to emotional contagion and potential stress. In such cases, emotional contagion could occur from human to nonhuman animal, from nonhuman animal to human, and between nonhuman animals, impacting multiple employees’ work behaviors and performance. This complexity, relevant to emotional contagion or emotional labor, has not been well-studied in any research context.
Finally, we expand on Hernandez et al.’s (Reference Hernandez, Melson-Silimon and Zickar2025) point regarding potential cultural differences in nonhuman working animals. Emotional contagion, as a psychosocial construct, appears to be universal because facial expression mimicry and a subsequent transfer of emotions have been observed in multiple cultures (Hatfield et al., Reference Hatfield, Rapson and Narine2018). However, display rules related to deliberate attempts to display or hide certain emotions (Brotheridge & Grandey, Reference Brotheridge and Grandey2002) can be influenced by cultural norms. Considering the key role of emotional expressions in emotional contagion, perhaps contagion for nonhuman working animals is more likely to occur in cultures that encourage emotional display in humans as opposed to those that discourage it.
Attention to partnerships between a human handler and a nonhuman working animal is an application of team work, communication, and leadership principles to a different type of dyad from typical I-O research, but we can learn more about the coordination of complementary skills by expanding our focus. The development of resilience, work group synchrony, and successful performance among SAR dogs is based partly on the quality of their training and their relationship with their handlers (Hare et al., Reference Hare, Kelsey, Niedermeyer and Otto2021). Given that the handler’s role involves leadership, there are parallels with I-O psychology research on the importance of leaders’ support and communication when guiding employees in stressful situations. SAR dogs that are highly attuned to their handler’s emotions are more likely to exhibit calmness and resilience when their handler remains calm and confident, using emotional contagion as a positive influence. Hernandez et al.’s (Reference Hernandez, Melson-Silimon and Zickar2025) ideas regarding the importance of examining nonhuman working animals can be used to study emotional contagion in new ways that may help I-O psychologists expand basic principles of teamwork, leadership, and emotion regulation at work.
Open access
