"Do not choose as I do!" - Dogs avoid the food that is indicated by another dog's gaze in a two-object choice task

Anna Bálint, Tamás Faragó, Zemihn Meike, Rita Lenkei, A. Miklósi, P. Pongrácz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Family dogs successfully follow human-given cues in a two-object choice test. However, whether this ability has any roots in dog-dog visual communication, has been seldom investigated. We designed a test where a video-projected, life-sized dog 'demonstrator' provided directional cues for the subjects by turning its head toward one of the two plates containing food. To avoid pseudo-replication, videos of 28 different dogs were recorded as 'demonstrators' N = 60 subjects were tested with a larger, smaller, or equally sized 'demonstrator', using a momentary head-and-gaze turn, while N=. 15 subjects were tested using sustained demonstrative cues. Social status of the subjects, based on a questionnaire (single-kept, dominant or subordinate), was also taken into account. Our results showed that dogs did not choose between the plates by relying on the momentary head turns of the projected demonstrator ( p = 0.35). Social rank did not have any effect on their choices either, however, 'single' dogs showed a left-side preference in their choices (p = 0.03). In the case of momentary gazing, all dogs developed strong side bias depending on their first choices (p <0.001). However, when the projected demonstrator performed sustained gazing, subjects avoided the indicated plate (p = 0.027). This is the first study showing that dogs do not follow the head turn cues given by another dog, but rather avoid the food that the other dog gazes at. This finding gives support to the theory that good performance of dogs in case of human-given cues may not have a direct predecessor in dog-dog communication, but rather relies on dogs' specific attention to humans and/or the plentiful opportunity to associate human directional gestures with food reward during the ontogeny.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)44-53
Number of pages10
JournalApplied Animal Behaviour Science
Volume170
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 1 2015

Fingerprint

pet foods
Dogs
Food
dogs
Cues
Head
animal communication
Communication
Canidae
Gestures
Aptitude
ontogeny
Reward

Keywords

  • Dog
  • Head turn
  • Video projection
  • Visual communication

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Animal Science and Zoology
  • Food Animals

Cite this

"Do not choose as I do!" - Dogs avoid the food that is indicated by another dog's gaze in a two-object choice task. / Bálint, Anna; Faragó, Tamás; Meike, Zemihn; Lenkei, Rita; Miklósi, A.; Pongrácz, P.

In: Applied Animal Behaviour Science, Vol. 170, 01.09.2015, p. 44-53.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{bbd854e6a346443e9d8ea9014beaaa7c,
title = "{"}Do not choose as I do!{"} - Dogs avoid the food that is indicated by another dog's gaze in a two-object choice task",
abstract = "Family dogs successfully follow human-given cues in a two-object choice test. However, whether this ability has any roots in dog-dog visual communication, has been seldom investigated. We designed a test where a video-projected, life-sized dog 'demonstrator' provided directional cues for the subjects by turning its head toward one of the two plates containing food. To avoid pseudo-replication, videos of 28 different dogs were recorded as 'demonstrators' N = 60 subjects were tested with a larger, smaller, or equally sized 'demonstrator', using a momentary head-and-gaze turn, while N=. 15 subjects were tested using sustained demonstrative cues. Social status of the subjects, based on a questionnaire (single-kept, dominant or subordinate), was also taken into account. Our results showed that dogs did not choose between the plates by relying on the momentary head turns of the projected demonstrator ( p = 0.35). Social rank did not have any effect on their choices either, however, 'single' dogs showed a left-side preference in their choices (p = 0.03). In the case of momentary gazing, all dogs developed strong side bias depending on their first choices (p <0.001). However, when the projected demonstrator performed sustained gazing, subjects avoided the indicated plate (p = 0.027). This is the first study showing that dogs do not follow the head turn cues given by another dog, but rather avoid the food that the other dog gazes at. This finding gives support to the theory that good performance of dogs in case of human-given cues may not have a direct predecessor in dog-dog communication, but rather relies on dogs' specific attention to humans and/or the plentiful opportunity to associate human directional gestures with food reward during the ontogeny.",
keywords = "Dog, Head turn, Video projection, Visual communication",
author = "Anna B{\'a}lint and Tam{\'a}s Farag{\'o} and Zemihn Meike and Rita Lenkei and A. Mikl{\'o}si and P. Pongr{\'a}cz",
year = "2015",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.applanim.2015.06.005",
language = "English",
volume = "170",
pages = "44--53",
journal = "Applied Animal Behaviour Science",
issn = "0168-1591",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - "Do not choose as I do!" - Dogs avoid the food that is indicated by another dog's gaze in a two-object choice task

AU - Bálint, Anna

AU - Faragó, Tamás

AU - Meike, Zemihn

AU - Lenkei, Rita

AU - Miklósi, A.

AU - Pongrácz, P.

PY - 2015/9/1

Y1 - 2015/9/1

N2 - Family dogs successfully follow human-given cues in a two-object choice test. However, whether this ability has any roots in dog-dog visual communication, has been seldom investigated. We designed a test where a video-projected, life-sized dog 'demonstrator' provided directional cues for the subjects by turning its head toward one of the two plates containing food. To avoid pseudo-replication, videos of 28 different dogs were recorded as 'demonstrators' N = 60 subjects were tested with a larger, smaller, or equally sized 'demonstrator', using a momentary head-and-gaze turn, while N=. 15 subjects were tested using sustained demonstrative cues. Social status of the subjects, based on a questionnaire (single-kept, dominant or subordinate), was also taken into account. Our results showed that dogs did not choose between the plates by relying on the momentary head turns of the projected demonstrator ( p = 0.35). Social rank did not have any effect on their choices either, however, 'single' dogs showed a left-side preference in their choices (p = 0.03). In the case of momentary gazing, all dogs developed strong side bias depending on their first choices (p <0.001). However, when the projected demonstrator performed sustained gazing, subjects avoided the indicated plate (p = 0.027). This is the first study showing that dogs do not follow the head turn cues given by another dog, but rather avoid the food that the other dog gazes at. This finding gives support to the theory that good performance of dogs in case of human-given cues may not have a direct predecessor in dog-dog communication, but rather relies on dogs' specific attention to humans and/or the plentiful opportunity to associate human directional gestures with food reward during the ontogeny.

AB - Family dogs successfully follow human-given cues in a two-object choice test. However, whether this ability has any roots in dog-dog visual communication, has been seldom investigated. We designed a test where a video-projected, life-sized dog 'demonstrator' provided directional cues for the subjects by turning its head toward one of the two plates containing food. To avoid pseudo-replication, videos of 28 different dogs were recorded as 'demonstrators' N = 60 subjects were tested with a larger, smaller, or equally sized 'demonstrator', using a momentary head-and-gaze turn, while N=. 15 subjects were tested using sustained demonstrative cues. Social status of the subjects, based on a questionnaire (single-kept, dominant or subordinate), was also taken into account. Our results showed that dogs did not choose between the plates by relying on the momentary head turns of the projected demonstrator ( p = 0.35). Social rank did not have any effect on their choices either, however, 'single' dogs showed a left-side preference in their choices (p = 0.03). In the case of momentary gazing, all dogs developed strong side bias depending on their first choices (p <0.001). However, when the projected demonstrator performed sustained gazing, subjects avoided the indicated plate (p = 0.027). This is the first study showing that dogs do not follow the head turn cues given by another dog, but rather avoid the food that the other dog gazes at. This finding gives support to the theory that good performance of dogs in case of human-given cues may not have a direct predecessor in dog-dog communication, but rather relies on dogs' specific attention to humans and/or the plentiful opportunity to associate human directional gestures with food reward during the ontogeny.

KW - Dog

KW - Head turn

KW - Video projection

KW - Visual communication

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84939569390&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84939569390&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.applanim.2015.06.005

DO - 10.1016/j.applanim.2015.06.005

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84939569390

VL - 170

SP - 44

EP - 53

JO - Applied Animal Behaviour Science

JF - Applied Animal Behaviour Science

SN - 0168-1591

ER -