Animal Cognition

, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp 257–265 | Cite as

The response of guide dogs and pet dogs (Canis Familiaris) to cues of human referential communication (pointing and gaze)

Original Paper

Abstract

The study raises the question of whether guide dogs and pet dogs are expected to differ in response to cues of referential communication given by their owners; especially since guide dogs grow up among sighted humans, and while living with their blind owners, they still have interactions with several sighted people. Guide dogs and pet dogs were required to respond to point, point and gaze, gaze and control cues of referential communication given by their owners. Results indicate that the two groups of dogs do not differ from each other, revealing that the visual status of the owner is not a factor in the use of cues of referential communication. Both groups of dogs have higher frequencies of performance and faster latencies for the point and the point and gaze cues as compared to gaze cue only. However, responses to control cues are below chance performance for the guide dogs, whereas the pet dogs perform at chance. The below chance performance of the guide dogs may be explained by a tendency among them to go and stand by the owner. The study indicates that both groups of dogs respond similarly in normal daily dyadic interaction with their owners and the lower comprehension of the human gaze may be a less salient cue among dogs in comparison to the pointing gesture.

Keywords

Referential communication Cues Dog-owner dyads Guide dogs Apprenticeship 

References

  1. Agnetta B, Hare B, Tomasello M (2000) Cues to food locations that domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) of different ages do and do not use. Anim Cogn 3:107–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bering JM (2004) A critical review of the ‘enculturation hypothesis’: the effects of human rearing on great ape social cognition. Anim Cogn 7:201–213PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bräuer J, Call J, Tomasello M (2004) Visual perspective-taking in dogs (Canis familiaris) in the presence of barriers. Appl Anim Behav Sci 88:299–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bräuer J, Kaminski J, Riedel J, Call J, Tomasello M (2006) Making inferences about the location of hidden food: social dog–causal ape. J Comp Psychol 120:38–47PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Byrne RW (2003) Animal communication. What makes a dog able to understand its masters. Curr Biol 13:R347–R348PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Call J, Tomasello M (1996) The effect of humans on the cognitive development of apes. In: Russon AE, Bard KA, Parker ST (eds) Reaching into thought: the minds of the great apes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 371–403Google Scholar
  7. Call J, Tomasello M (2004) Social cognition. In: Maestripieri D (ed) Primate psychology. Harvard University Press, USA, pp 234–253Google Scholar
  8. Call J, Agnetta B, Tomasello M (2000) Cues that chimpanzees do and do not use to find hidden objects. Anim Cogn 3:23–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Call J, Bräuer J, Kaminski J, Tomasello M (2003) Domestic dogs are sensitive to the attentional state of humans. J Comp Psychol 117:257–263PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cooper JJ, Aston C, Bishop S, West R, Mills DS, Young RJ (2003) Clever hounds: social cognition in the domestic dog (Canis familiaris). App Anim Behav Sci 81:229–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Csányi V (2000) The ‘human behaviour complex’ and the compulsion of communication: key factors in human evolution. Semiotica 128:45–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dunn OJ (1964) Multiple comparisons using ranks. Technometrics 6:241–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gácsi M, Miklósi Á, Varga O, Topál J, Csányi V (2004) Are readers of our face readers of our minds? Dogs (Canis familiaris) show situation-dependent recognition of human’s attention. Anim Cogn 7:144–153PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gaunet F (2008) How do guide dogs and pet dogs (Canis familiaris) ask their owners for food? Anim Cogn 11(3):475–483Google Scholar
  15. Goldin Meadow S (1999) The role of gesture in communication and thinking. Trends Cogn Sci 3:419–429PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gomez DC (2005) Species comparative studies and cognitive development. Trends Cogn Sci 9:118–125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hare B (2001) Can competitive paradigms increase the validity of experiments on primate social cognition? Anim Cogn 4:269–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hare B, Tomasello M (1999) Domestic dogs (Canis Familiaris) use human and conspecific social cues to locate hidden food. J Comp Psychol 113:173–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hare B, Tomasello M (2004) Chimpanzees are more skilful in competitive than cooperative cognitive tasks. Anim Behav 68:571–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hare B, Tomasello M (2005) Human-like social skills in dogs? Trends Cogn Sci 9:439–444PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hare B, Call J, Tomasello M (1998) Communication and food location between human and dogs (Canis familiaris). Evol Commun 2:137–159Google Scholar
  22. Hare B, Brown M, Williamson C, Tomasello M (2002) The domestication of social cognition in dogs. Science 298:1634–1636PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hare B, Plyusnina I, Ignacio N, Schepina O, Stepika A, Wrangham R, Trut L (2005) Social cognitive evolution in captive foxed is a correlated by product of experimental domestication. Curr Biol 15:226–230PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Heyes CM (1994) Cues, convergence and curmudgeon: a reply to Povinelli. Anim Behav 48:242–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Itakura S (2004) Gaze following and joint visual attention in nonhuman animals. Jpn Psychol Res 46:216–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kerepesi A, Jonsson GK, Miklósi Á, Topál J, Csányi V, Magnusson MS (2005) Detection of long-term temporal patterns in dog-human interaction. J Behav Processes 70:69–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maros K, Gácsi M, Miklósi Á (2008) Comprehension of human pointing gestures in horses (Equus caballus). Anim Cogn 11:3 467–466Google Scholar
  28. McKinley J, Sambrook TD (2000) Use of human given cues by domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) and horses (Equus caballus). Anim Cogn 3:13–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Miklósi Á, Soproni K (2006) A comparative analysis of animals’ understanding of the human pointing gesture. Anim Cogn 9:81–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Miklósi Á, Polgárdi R, Topál J, Csányi V (1998) Use of experimenter given cues in dogs. Anim Cogn 1:113–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Miklósi Á, Kubinyi E, Topál J, Gasci M, Viranyi Z, Csányi V (2003) A simple reason for a big difference: wolves do not look back at humans but dogs do. Curr Biol 13:763–766PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Miklósi Á, Topál J, Csányi V (2004) Comparative social cognition: what can dogs teach us? Anim Behav 67:995–1004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Miklósi Á, Pongrácz P, Lakatos G, Topál J, Csányi V (2005) A comparative study of dog-human and cat-human interactions in communicative contexts. J Comp Psychol 119:179–186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Naderi A, Miklósi Á, Dóka A, Csányi V (2001) Co-operative interactions between blind persons and their dogs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 74:59–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Povinelli DJ, Reaux JE, Bierschwale DT, Allain AD, Simon BB (1997) Exploitation of pointing as a referential gesture in young children, but not adolescent chimpanzees. Cogn Dev 12:423–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Scheumann M, Call J (2004) The use of experimenter given cues by South African fur seals (Arctocephalus pusillus). Anim Cogn 7:224–231PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Shapiro AD, Janik VM, Slater PJB (2003) Gray seal (Halichoerus grypus) pup responses to experimental-given pointing and directional cues. J Comp Psychol 117:355–362PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Siegel S, Castellan JN Jr (1988) Non parametric statistics for the behavioural sciences, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  39. Soproni K, Miklósi Á, Topál J, Csányi V (2001) Comprehension of human communicative signs in pet dogs (Canis familiaris). J Comp Psychol 115:122–126PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Soproni K, Miklósi Á, Topál J, Csányi V (2002) Dogs’ responsiveness to human pointing gestures. J Comp Psychol 116:27–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tomasello M, Call J (2004) The role of humans in the cognitive development of apes revisted. Anim Cogn 7:213–215PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tomasello M, Call J, Gluckman A (1997a) Comprehension of novel communicative signs by apes and human children. Child Dev 68:1067–1080PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tomasello M, Call J, Hare B (1997b) Five primate species follow the visual gaze of conspecifics. Anim Behav 55:1063–1069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Viranyi Z, Topál J, Gácsi M, Miklósi Á, Csányi V (2004) Dogs respond appropriately to cues of humans’ attentional focus. Behav Processes 66:161–172PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Virányi Z, Gácsi M, Kubinyi E, Topál J, Belényi B, Ujfalussy D, Miklósi Á (2008) Comprehension of human pointing gestures in young human-reared wolves (Canis lupus) and dogs (Canis familiaris). Anim Cogn 11(3):373–387Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyChrist UniversityBangaloreIndia
  2. 2.Laboratoire Eco-Anthropologie et EthnobiologieMuséum National Histoire NaturelleParisFrance

Personalised recommendations