dog cognition

discussion: new method to test guesser/knower association in dogs (balancing method?)

(i.e., the Balancing^ method) that allows the Guesser and the Knower to turn their heads in the same direction (i.e., to the right or the left) on each trial

how long was dogs behavior analyzed for AB

*The dog's behaviour was analyzed for number of ABs in the 10 s after the owner's return to the room

what could these contingencies be used for?

-Applied animal training -Use of jackpots -capitalizing on differential reinforcement

OTHER WAYS OBSERVER DOGS COULD'VE KNOWN FOOD WAS THERE BESIDES SNOUT CONTACT:

-demonstrator could've been licking lips when returning from eating in observation phase - possible auditory cues from the demonstrator dog's eating - there was a high probability that the observer dogs smelled the food

what 3 criteria must the dogs pass to be included in study

1. only dogs over 6 months old who had lived with their current owners for at least 3 months 2. only dogs who were the sole canid pet in the household were used, in order to eliminate the possibility of between-dog interaction during the trials 3. dogs who followed the owner's request to sit and stay for 10 s, and to refrain from eating a treat (on the owner's instruction) for 10 s.

exp 1 predictions

1. they should be less likely to follow the Knower's information in the pointing condition than in the marker condition 2. if dogs do not have a human-like bias to defer to communicative cues, then they should be equally likely, or more likely, to follow the Knower's information in the pointing condition than in the marker condition.

what should future work focus on to improve understanding of trials?

1.how dogs evaluate these other communicative cue 2. If dogs had a bias to defer to communicative cues, they should have shown a disadvantage for communicative cues in the current studies, rather than an advantage 3. future work should more closely investigate whether dogs are evaluating the informants' knowledge, per se, or whether they may instead be focusing on other extraneous cues

Why do most species fail RRC task? (predictions) 3

1.predisposition toward larger quantities 2.behavioral momentum 3.the reinforcing effects of the small magnitude reward

how early can infants begin modifying their behavior to follow these cues?

12 months

subjects

14 dogs All owners used scolding on dogs before

exp 1 testing trials

16 trials (8 visible/8hidden) Guesser turned around during hiding process while knower sat forward seeing hiding process Guesser then turned back around Knower and guesser both cued the cup in front of them (knower always had correct cup/guesser always had incorrect cup) Marker vs pointing Subject had 30 sec

set up of observer group

24 observer group was divided into 2 12 dogs who have participated in similar experiments before 12 dogs who have never participated in an experiment

Experimental procedure

3 plates in front of dog condition 1- piece of food condition 2/3 - visual stimulus one plate contained small stimulus, one large stimulus, and one no stimulus experimenter out of dogs sight to avoid clever hans 10 sec to make a choice Reconducted trial if it was no choice 9 trials per session Once 78% or more the larger reward was selected, conditions ended

CONDITION 1:FOOD

3 plates: large amount of food, small amount of food, no food

CONDITION 2: Analogous stimuli

3 plates: large white square, small white square, no white square

subjects

37 dogs 24 observer / 13 demonstrator

how many trials and what was recorded

4 experimental trials: 2 food and 2 nonfood Recorded time it took to go to food location, what boxes the dog visited, and whether there was snout contact with demonstrator

how many phases and what r they?

4 phases 1. food presentation 2. demonstration 3.interaction 4.test

exp 1 Procedure

4 warm up trials (make sure there was no bias towards one cup) 16 test trials Half dogs assigned to pointing condition Half dogs assigned to marker condition Two trial types: visible and hidden the test trials were presented in a 2 × 2 design, where condition (pointing vs. marker) was a between-subjects factor and trial type (visible vs. hidden) was a within-subjects factor hidden trials allowed us to see whether dogs, like human children, have a bias to defer to communicative cu

exp 2 subjects

40 dogs 10 excluded/failed warm up

EXPERIMENT 1 Subjects

40 dogs 6 excluded All were pets

subjects

9 dogs

Preference assessment

All preference assessments involved the same three foods: turkey, bologna, and American cheese 6 trials The highest-preferred food (i.e., the one chosen most often) was used throughout all experimental sessions

Demonstration phase

Both demonstrator dog and observer dog entered test area Observer dog had to remain in middle of yard while demonstrator dog was released to go to area where he previously saw food being baited (he either got no food in no food trials or was allowed to eat food in food trials behind the blinds) then demonstrator returned to middle of yard

exp 1 Coding and data analysis

Choice defined as the moment dogs nose crossed the line infront of cup Accuracy defined as subject first crossed line infront of baited/unbaited cup and time (if they failed to do it in 30 sec) The baiter coded subjects and another blind coder also coded for accuracy/bias

procedure and steps

Conducted in owners home Experimenter in room Decided which treat was most appealing to subject Owner was instructed to get dogs attention and tell them to sit Owner then showed dog treat, told dog no! or no eat and then placed treat on floor in view but out of reach Owner then left room, experimenter went and grabbed treat and offered it to dog Owner returned after 20 sec

Food presentation phase

Demonstrator dog observed baiting in one of 4 boxes Two dif treatments for observer dogs: no food and food

Dogs will choose optimally when given a choice between a large and a small amount of food (choosing the larger amount) this is also seen in 5 other animals:

Dolphins Orangutangs Salamanders Rats Children

Through the process of domestication and extensive experience with humans, dogs have learned to interpret and rely on human communicative cues which are... (3)

Eye contact high-pitched infant-directed speech pointing

two hypothesis for this experiment: dogs feel guilt or dont?

First hypothesis: that disobedience causes an increase in Abs (nine behaviours associated with the guilty look (hereinafter referred to as Associated Behaviours, Abs) Second hypothesis: the behaviours of the guilty look are instead prompted by the scolding, chastisement, or mere appearance of an owner who believes that an instruction has been disobeyed: that scolding causes an increase in ABs whether the dog has obeyed or disobeyed

what was the analysis of severity of guilty look?

For analysis, the level of the guilty look was considered on an ordinal scale, treating the number of ABs as an indication of the intensity of the reaction.

what does future research needs to control for?

History of reinforcement for choosing a large stimulus over a small stimulus

what changed in the owners knowledge among trials?

In two trials, lied to owner about dog eating or not eating treat In two trials, owner was told truth about dogs behavior

exp 1 Apparatus

Large room Owner and 3 experimenters present Two experimenters were informants and one was baiter Two plastic cups upside down Both were false baited with food Sausage or treats used In marker condition, informants indicated their choice with block of wood and the color of wood matched the informants shirt color

RESULTS

Mean number of sessions to reach criterion were 6.89 (1), 5.78 (2), 7 (3) all dogs continued to choose the large visual stimulus in Condition 3, despite receiving the smaller-magnitude food as a reward choose optimally same for condition 1 and 2

Do primates demonstrate a human-like sensitivity to communicative cues?

NO

are gray wolves or wolf cubs raised by humans able to follow human communicative cues from an early age?

NO

RRC task with chimps, did they pass?

NO still chose large stimulus

Interaction phase

Observer dog could smell demonstrator (snout contact) then demonstrator left

Test phase

Observer dogs stayed in yard and were directed to rotate in a circle 3 times then were released into the yard If observer dogs went to same box as demonstrator and stayed there for 5 seconds then they were given the treat

exp 1 Warm up trials:

Only cue provided was gaze direction Dogs witnessed hiding process If dog approached correct cup, it got treat If incorrect cup, it was shown empty plate then shown correct cup and not given treat If dog did not make choice within 30 sec No choice if they did not pursue cups Needed to choose correct cup ¾ times to move onto testing phase 4 dogs excluded for failing warm ups

exp 2 results

Our model revealed that subjects' accuracy was significantly predicted by trial type (visible vs hidden) As in Experiment 1, dogs chose the correct cup more often than chance when hiding process was visible to dogs Moreover, as in the pointing condition of Experiment 1, dogs chose the correct cup indicated by the Knower marginally more often than chance when the hiding process was hidden dogs were equally likely to override the Guesser's information whether the informants used communicative pointing cues or noncommunicative grasping cues. dogs do not demonstrate a specific bias to defer to communicative cues.

exp 1 results HIDDEN trials

Our model revealed that subjects' tendency to favor the Knower over the Guesser was significantly predicted by both the cue used and trial type dogs were less likely to be distracted by the Guesser, and thus were more likely to follow the Knower in the pointing condition (M = 4.60 out of eight total trials, SD = 1.54) than in the marker condition

experimental area / apparatus

Outdoor enclosure 4 plastic boxes covered by blinds No food inside any boxes Small plastic box was lowered into bigger boxes that contained food reward (mask smell from the observer dogs)

what elements of the experiment were varied? how did the owners respond based on the dogs behavior?

Over four trials, two elements were varied: obedience and owner response. In each trial, the subject either disobeyed and ate the treat or obeyed and did not eat the treat If the dog had eaten the treat when the owner left it was scolded by the owner when they returned ; if it had not eaten the treat, it was praised by the owner when they returned

The ability to follow a conspecific to a food location has been shown in various animals:

Pigs Rats Chimps Great tits

Exposure trials

Prior to first test session, 9 exposure trials All 3 plates had been presented in all 3 positions

CONDITION 3: RRC

Same as condition 2 but small square resulted in large food and large square resulted in small food

exp 2 procedure

Same as experiment 1 BUT compared the pointing condition to a non-communicative grasping condition we used a between-subjects design in which dogs were either assigned to the pointing condition or to the grasping condition visible and hidden 16 trials

how did they attempt to modify RRC task with primates?

Tried RRC task with analogous symbols (share features similar to those of the food received; rocks =pieces of candy) and they still failed

discussion:

We found that the use of analogous symbolic representations did not change the dogs' choice of the large stimulus in Condition 2 That is, all dogs continued to choose the stimulus previously associated with the large-magnitude food reward, despite receiving the small-magnitude food reward instead in Condition 3

Do dogs demonstrates a strikingly human-like sensitivity to human communicative cues?

YES

are dogs able to follow human communicative cues from an early age?

YES

were these same results found in children (ages 3-4)

YES

dogs will continue to follow the inaccurate pointing, even though they do not get a reward similar to children who can learn override inaccurate physical cues but not inaccurate communication; this means that both dogs and children share...

a bias to defer to others' direct communication.

what could the guilty look actually be

a look of fearful anticipation of punishment by the owner.

dogs read humans by observing their behavior; we interpret dog behavior through...

anthropomorphisms- Anthropomorphisms are claims which are generally unsupported by scientific research

what are the Nine behaviours associated with the guilty look (ABs)?

avoiding eye contact lying down and rolling to the side lying down and rolling onto the back dropping the tail wagging low and quickly holding one's ears down or head down moving away from the owner raising a paw licking

What other primates have been tested with RRC and ALL FAILED?

chimps Mangabeys Japanese macaques Orangutangs Lemurs

or dogs cannot avoid innacurate information through direct communication because they see this communication as a...

command that must be followed.

what were the 3 conditions

condition 1- food condition 2 - visual stimulus condition 3 - visual stimulus/RRC

children are able to avoid inaccurate information provided via physical cues (i.e., a physical marker), however they cannot override inaccurate information when it is provided via

direct communication (pointing)

discussion: why might have dogs selected the guesser in marker condition?

dogs in the marker condition of Experiment 1 were significantly more likely to select the cup indicated by the Guesser than the Knower. Dogs' preference for the Guesser in the marker condition suggests that dogs may have generally been drawn to the Guesser's information at baseline, potentially due to extraneous motion cues the Guesser made when turning around before the choice phase

exp 1 results VISIBLE trials

dogs were also marginally more likely to follow the Knower's information in the pointing condition than in the marker when the hiding process was visible, dogs are not biased to defer to communicative cues like pointing in the same way as human children

results: female vs male snout contact

female dogs had snout contact equally often during the two stages Male dogs typically had less snout contact when no food was found observer dogs that had snout contact with their conspecifics went faster

what causes food preferences in rats, mice, Mongolian gerbils, and spiny mice?

food odours detected on the breath of a conspecific allowed its identification

total of 9 trials

four experimental trials, two control trials, and three mock trials that served as intermissions between experimental trials. The four critical trials varied along two measures: whether the dog ate the treat, and whether the dog was scolded or greeted. To test the hypothesis that ABs increase after doing a disallowed act, the trials varied the dog's opportunity to eat the treat. To test the hypothesis that ABs are a response to owner chastising behaviour, the owner's knowledge of the dog's obedience was varied

what are other domesticated animals able to follow human communicative cues? (3)

foxes horses goats

Two examples of communicative cues human adults use to signal their intention to teach information to young infants and children?

high-pitched infant-directed speech and eye contact

dogs have served as...

hunting partners, guard dogs, and household companions

dogs interpret human communicative cues in a very different way from human infants, namely as..

imperatives or commands

* Social foraging by vertebrates often depends not on specialized signals, but on

information-bearing cues

how to perform RRC task

initial discrimination task in which the subject receives a large magnitude reward for selecting the larger stimulus (e.g., with food and a visual stimulus) and a small-magnitude reward for selecting the smaller stimulus. Then the subject completes the RRC task, which involves presenting them with a choice between the same stimuli used in the previous condition, but the consequences obtained for their selection are reversed

dogs who participated in obedience classes prior to the experimental test showed...

more ABs in the two scold trials than those dogs not so trained associated with a more expressive guilty look These dogs may have learned to express submission ritually when encountering certain owner behaviours

WHEN WERE MORE AB'S OBSERVED AND CONCLUSION

more ABs were seen in trials when the owner scolded the dog, whether the dog had disobeyed or not that it is scolding behaviour that causes an increase in ABs

results:

no significant main effect of the dog's obedience on the number of Abs (similar when dog ate treat or didn't eat treat) Scolding the dog led to significantly more ABs than greeting the dog, whether the dog had obeyed the owner's command or was guilty of violating the command scolding led to higher rates of ABs when the dog had not eaten the treat than when the dog had eaten the treat In the scold trials, the obedience-class group displayed significantly more ABs than the non-obedience-class group On the final control trial, in which the owner stayed in the room after issuing the instruction not to eat, every dog refrained from eating the food for at least 30 s; 86% (12/14) of the dogs refrained from eating the food for over a minute, or until the trial was stopped No dog showed more than 5 ABs in one trial. The AB of "pawraising," though seen in interaction with the owners, was seen only once in the trials

results: how quickly observers went to food and how often they went to location first etc

observer dogs that had snout contact with their conspecifics went faster to the presented potential food location in trials where the demonstrator dogs found food than where they did not they went faster to the first corner if the demonstrator dogs had found food before In trials where the demonstrator dog had found food, 56.5% of the observer dogs that had no snout contact went to the presented location on their first choice and 26% never went to this corner If the observer dogs had snout contact during this trial, 84% went to the presented corner on their first choice and 4% did not go to the presented corner. In trials where the demonstrator dogs had not found food, 15.4% of the dogs that had snout contact went to the presented corner on their first choice and 54% did not go to this corner during this trial If the observer dogs had no snout contact during the trial 'no food', 31.5% of the dogs went to the presented corner on their first choice and 43% of the observer dogs did not go to this corner therefore, the influence of snout contact was different according to the demonstrators' success at finding food

how were the 9 AB's identified

owner questionnare

how do rabbits choose diets

pups raised by mothers fed different diets during pregnancy and lactation showed a clear preference for the diet of their mothers at weaning Three equally effective means of information transmission in rabbits were found: the faeces deposited by the mother in the nest, prenatal experiences, and contact with the mother during nursing

what is an additional tactic used by corvids, ravens, and jays?

raiding An additional foraging tactic is to observe a food-storing conspecific, and to locate and raid the caches later

how do rats choose diets

rat preferred the diet that was previously eaten by a demonstrator conspecific with whom the observer had interacted before olfactory cues passing from demonstrator to observer provided enough information about the diets for the observer to make its choice

exp 2 apparatus

same as exp 1

what do chickens use to attract conspecifics to food?

specific vocal food calls Male domestic chickens produce food calls that communicate information about food quality to a hen The roosters modulate these calls by social context: the calling is enhanced in the presence of a hen, and inhibited in the presence of another cock

Research asking owners what they believed their dogs "know" found "disallowance" as the most frequent response, what is that

that dogs have knowledge of an implicit code of allowable and not allowed acts. The code of behaviour is at times not just implicit, but explicit: owners alleged that their dogs understood the rules of the household

mock trials

the dog and owner or experimenter interacted without the stress of the continual commands

control trial

the dog was exposed to the treat with the owner present, allowed to eat the treat, and greeted by the owner

WHEN WAS EFFECT OF SCOLDING MORE PRONOUNCED?

the effect of scolding was more pronounced when the dog was obedient, and did not eat the treat

the three dogs whose owners scolded them not only with a stern word of displeasure but with more physical means showed ...

the highest number of ABs seen in the scold trials

Although dogs can learn to avoid inaccurate communication after a large number of trials, they struggle to override inaccurate communication on...

the short time scales in which children are typically tested

Hearing ... may attract a companion that has learned the meaning of this particular sound what animal is this seen in?

the sound produced by a conspecific while eating This phenomenon is observed in agoutis, which are attracted by the rasping sound a conspecific makes when gnawing on a nut

One common function of symbolic stimuli is that

they allow the subject to inhibit strong behavioral predispositions; the reverse reward contingency (RRC) task is one common inhibition task

how do primates share information about location, quantity, and quality of food how do chimps show other where food is

use food calls that share this info leading others to the reward by drawing attention to themselves through actions such as tapping others on the shoulders or repeatedly glancing at them while heading in the direction of the food

... are used by some birds that are attracted by other birds feeding at a particular location

visual cues

how young pups/adult dogs learn to aquire food?

young puppies can learn by observing how others obtain food and adult dogs are able to imitate a conspecific in an inferential, selective manner to get food out of a box